Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Then propose an amendment to ban that too, actually, whilst at it propose an amendment that the state mandates exactly what one wears.
    Neither fully nude, nor fully covered, nor with racist and homophobic symbols.

    Simple.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Josb)
    Neither fully nude, nor fully covered, nor with racist and homophobic symbols.

    Simple.
    And that would achieve what exactly?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    The main point of the face vail is to stop the man for falling for a pretty girl and making them get to know the persons personality instead.
    Please don't tell me you are saying this from the standpoint of a socialist, liberal and/or feminist?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Really? Then why is it that after the bill's signing, a restaurant owner called Ryan called Indianapolis radio to say that his Christian belief in "Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" means he is now able to turn away same-sex couples.
    I meant in the context of the British government. It was a bit out of the blue that you brought up an anti-LGBT law in the states, so I was saying that there is no plan for that here.

    Link doesn't work.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    I agree somewhat with Aph. Modesty is very important in Islam, and in it's most modern form women have the ability to choose what they want to wear. So when a woman is wearing a headscarf, she's doing so from her own volition and it's very much the same for when she's wearing the full veil. It's actually pretty feminist, women not allowing themselves to be defined by their physical appeal.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Please don't tell me you are saying this from the standpoint of a socialist, liberal and/or feminist?
    Yes I am. That is why the women say that they wear them and to say otherwise without proof is insensitive.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    I meant in the context of the British government. It was a bit out of the blue that you brought up an anti-LGBT law in the states, so I was saying that there is no plan for that here.



    Link doesn't work.
    Oh really? You clearly don't follow UK-wide politics news then. A bill with the exact same aims of the Indian Law called the 'Conscience Clause Bill' was written up by the DUP:
    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...-30845098.html

    My bad:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Yes I am. That is why the women say that they wear them and to say otherwise without proof is insensitive.
    How many women? Have you taken a study?

    Regardless of the intention of a few women, the garment was originally made for, and intended as, a symbol of male domination and misogyny. A golliwog doesn't suddenly become acceptable because people who display them claim not to be racist; it's the history and ongoing symbolism of the thing that makes it racist.

    I don't know how someone who claims to be socialist, liberal, feminist, etc. can act as an apologist for such a blatant symbol of misogyny.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Oh really? You clearly don't follow UK-wide politics news then. A bill with the exact same aims of the Indian Law called the 'Conscience Clause Bill' was written up by the DUP:
    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...-30845098.html
    What point are you trying to make from this that is at all relevant to the thread or the topic we were discussing?


    My bad:
    This translates as a cop-out to answering my question, to me.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    How many women? Have you taken a study?

    Regardless of the intention of a few women, the garment was originally made for, and intended as, a symbol of male domination and misogyny. A golliwog doesn't suddenly become acceptable because people who display them claim not to be racist; it's the history and ongoing symbolism of the thing that makes it racist.

    I don't know how someone who claims to be socialist, liberal, feminist, etc. can act as an apologist for such a blatant symbol of misogyny.
    And you know this how? Or have you just decided that it must be male domination because you need an excuse to hate Islam? I point you to the quote from James.

    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    I agree somewhat with Aph. Modesty is very important in Islam, and in it's most modern form women have the ability to choose what they want to wear. So when a woman is wearing a headscarf, she's doing so from her own volition and it's very much the same for when she's wearing the full veil. It's actually pretty feminist, women not allowing themselves to be defined by their physical appeal.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    What point are you trying to make from this that is at all relevant to the thread or the topic we were discussing?
    Well what point are you trying to make?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    And you know this how? Or have you just decided that it must be male domination because you need an excuse to hate Islam? I point you to the quote from James.
    It takes a simple Google search to discover for what purpose the face veil was made, and it's certainly not for the reason you previously gave. Are you seriously suggesting that it was not originally made as a symbol of inequality against women? Why don't men feel obliged to wear a face veil then, for the reasons you mentioned?

    Or have you just decided that it must be male domination because you need an excuse to hate Islam?
    Straw man alert.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Regardless of the intention of a few women, the garment was originally made for, and intended as, a symbol of male domination and misogyny. A golliwog doesn't suddenly become acceptable because people who display them claim not to be racist; it's the history and ongoing symbolism of the thing that makes it racist.

    I don't know how someone who claims to be socialist, liberal, feminist, etc. can act as an apologist for such a blatant symbol of misogyny.
    To rebut your point on the golliwogs, for someone else to display them is not in the power of black people and therefore isn't really relevant to the debate. To wear a veil is in the power of a woman. The difference is, if I were to force a woman to wear a veil then indeed I would be acting out in misogyny, just as the person displaying the golliwog would most likely be racist. However, when black people use the N-word, they are taking something that would have originally been deemed a symbol of oppression and taking it as their own thus removing the oppressing nature of it, much like a woman wearing a veil as is her prerogative.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Why don't men feel obliged to wear a face veil then, for the reasons you mentioned?
    To argue this from a feminist stance, men haven't really ever been valued based solely on their physical appeal, whereas women have been for a while, and to some extent even today. The fact that some women have taken the veil (previously a symbol of oppression) and made it into a symbol of freedom for many whom choose to wear it, is something that should be encouraged, it may put an end to the general repression of women in society.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    It takes a simple Google search to discover for what purpose the face veil was made, and it's certainly not for the reason you previously gave. Are you seriously suggesting that it was not originally made as a symbol of inequality against women? Why don't men feel obliged to wear a face veil then, for the reasons you mentioned?



    Straw man alert.
    Yes, I belive that that is the main reason women wear it today at least, and I think that if a woman wants to wear a hijab or burqua because they don't want to be objectified by men then that is fine by me.

    Also it should be noted that there is a male head scarf in Islam.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keffiyeh
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Please don't tell me you are saying this from the standpoint of a socialist, liberal and/or feminist?
    It baffles me as well.

    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    I agree somewhat with Aph. Modesty is very important in Islam,
    So women who don't wear a full veil are immodest?

    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    So when a woman is wearing a headscarf, she's doing so from her own volition and it's very much the same for when she's wearing the full veil. It's actually pretty feminist, women not allowing themselves to be defined by their physical appeal.
    No, wearing a scarf is not the same as wearing a sheet that covers the whole body. You can still see the person who wears the former.

    I just can't believe that a socialist says the burqa is feminist.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    To rebut your point on the golliwogs, for someone else to display them is not in the power of black people and therefore isn't really relevant to the debate. To wear a veil is in the power of a woman. The difference is, if I were to force a woman to wear a veil then indeed I would be acting out in misogyny, just as the person displaying the golliwog would most likely be racist. However, when black people use the N-word, they are taking something that would have originally been deemed a symbol of oppression and taking it as their own thus removing the oppressing nature of it, much like a woman wearing a veil as is her prerogative.
    Power is irrelevant. The plain fact remains that a golliwog symbolises racism and a face veil symbolises misogyny. If a black family displayed a golliwog in their window, that would not stop people protesting or reporting them to the police - because it symbolises racism full stop.

    Do you also subscribe to the notion that black people cannot be racist to themselves or other black people, gay people cannot be homophobic, etc.?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    To argue this from a feminist stance, men haven't really ever been valued based solely on their physical appeal, whereas women have been for a while, and to some extent even today. The fact that some women have taken the veil (previously a symbol of oppression) and made it into a symbol of freedom for many whom choose to wear it, is something that should be encouraged, it may put an end to the general repression of women in society.
    :eek4:

    My. ****ing. god.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Josb)
    It baffles me as well.


    So women who don't wear a full veil are immodest?


    No, wearing a scarf is not the same as wearing a sheet that covers the whole body. You can still see the person who wears the former.

    I just can't believe that a socialist says the burqa is feminist.
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Power is irrelevant. The plain fact remains that a golliwog symbolises racism and a face veil symbolises misogyny. If a black family displayed a golliwog in their window, that would not stop people protesting or reporting them to the police - because it symbolises racism full stop.

    Do you also subscribe to the notion that black people cannot be racist to themselves or other black people, gay people cannot be homophobic, etc.?
    You're both forgetting that it's a choice for women to wear the burqa. There is no greater infringement of civil liberties than the state dictating what people can and can't wear. If a woman feel empowered from wearing the burqa then she has every right to wear it, as it's her own personal liberty to do so. Forcing someone to show their face when they might not want to is just as bad as forcing them to cover up when they might not want to imo.

    I'm against sexism, homophobia, racism and whatever else whether it be coming from women, gays or black people.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    There is no greater infringement of civil liberties than the state dictating what people can and can't wear.
    "no greater infringement of civil liberties", really?

    Even voting, free speech, freedom of the press, fair trial, etc. pass after the right to wear a full veil for you?
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 21, 2015
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.