Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Jack)
    I don't know why people are so bothered by burkas - worrying about them feels like a monumental waste of everyone's time.

    Personally I think they look cool and have no problem with them at all.
    Are you 5?
    • TSR Community Team
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    Study Helper
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    Are you 5?
    :facepalm2:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    The thing I worry about is that these women are caught in between their religious leaders and scriptures telling them to hide their bodies, and western authorities forcing them to dress in a way that makes visible the body that they have been made to feel so many negative things about. They're caught in a crossfire of shame and control. I hate the idea of a woman being covered but we shouldn't target the woman. France should have targeted the religious men who coerce these women into dressing in such a way.
    I'm not a fan of the burqa (read: niqaab) either, but a lot of Western work to emancipate women from other cultures is done via the angle of painting men in said countries as savages who must be defeated by the Enlightened White Man; this perspective is ********.

    The recent French ban on the burkini for example, failed to take into account the agency of women; it mirrors the oppressive patriarchal thinking - top-down control over women's clothing. It has nothing to do with "liberating" women, as the French Supreme Court was able to recognise and overturn the ban.

    It reminds me of the colonial mentality: Both the British in India and the Americans in Afghanistan made women’s clothing and gender crimes into signatures of an alien and barbaric culture. Moral campaigns against such ‘offensive’ practices are in reality sophisticated imperial technologies of control. For populations ‘at home,’ bare-breasted Hindu women and burqa-clad Afghan women become convenient emblems of both strangeness and the need for corrective conquest. When the Hindu woman puts on a long-sleeved blouse and a petticoat, or when an Afghan woman throws off her burqa, it equals conquest and success of the colonial venture.

    The singling out of gendered crimes, sati in India and honour killings in Afghanistan, dramatises the otherness of the Hindu or Afghan male. He becomes an indigenous evil requiring heroic foreign intervention. The sophistication of this kind of enemy-making is that it renders one half of the local population – the victims of these crimes – allies of the occupation. Actual Hindu widows and Afghan women are rarely, if ever, heard from, as their experiences and perspective might complicate a silence that the Anglo-American empire can imagine as gratitude.

    If the niqaab were to be banned here, the opposition would mainly consist of Muslim women, not men.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Jack)
    I don't know why people are so bothered by burkas - worrying about them feels like a monumental waste of everyone's time.

    Personally I think they look cool and have no problem with them at all.
    This is the worst attempt at an argument I've seen on here for a long time, and that is saying something.

    Ladies and gents, I give you the TSR mods.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Personally I think that any law forcing people to wear or not wear something is fundamentally wrong.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    The thing I worry about is that these women are caught in between their religious leaders and scriptures telling them to hide their bodies, and western authorities forcing them to dress in a way that makes visible the body that they have been made to feel so many negative things about. They're caught in a crossfire of shame and control. I hate the idea of a woman being covered but we shouldn't target the woman. France should have targeted the religious men who coerce these women into dressing in such a way.
    Difficult, if impossible, thing to do though.
    • TSR Community Team
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    Study Helper
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    This is the worst attempt at an argument I've seen on here for a long time, and that is saying something.

    Ladies and gents, I give you the TSR mods.
    It's not an argument, it is a view.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Right guys, first off, there's a disclaimer here... I'm a white British muslim who's spent time in uniform... my life has been very "non-standard" and my views are therefore entirely my own.

    First: surveys and polls always have an inherent bias. This is because they aren't run by "Professor Xavier" and hence can only capture data that people choose to supply. This means they tend to capture data from people who (a) have time to answer and (b) find the issue worth commenting on. If we put (a) and (b) together, a more accurate title for the poll may be "the majority of (a) unemployed (b) racists plus a few bored politics students support a burqa ban". I really wish that newspapers and blogs would stop publishing results with such sweeping titles because they create an unwitting influence campaign and confirmation bias in the (tiny) minds of racists.

    Second: I agree that repression/oppression of women exists. Marrying/forcing a child into sexual relationships is wrong (Yemen, I'm looking at you). FGM is abhorrent. However, the burqa is a piece of clothing. It sits at the other end of the spectrum from a thong bikini, but it's just clothing. Guys who say "it's a symbol of oppression" are making the same error (in a different direction) as guys who say "she's asking for it" when a girl's in a short dress. Clothes are clothes. This doesn't mean I would wear a burqa, but that's my choice and if a girl chooses to wear one, that's her choice. You will be in class at university with girls in burqas. They've chosen to study, chosen to move away from home (sometimes to a different country)... they've also chosen to wear a certain type of clothing and believe in something (in exactly the same way a nun or football fan does) and are not "oppressed". Underneath that burqa there's a girl who deserves your respect and is going to be more than capable of being a brilliant friend (although they may skip the drinking games).
    Confession time: I've had intimate sexual relationships with girls who wear the burqa... believe me, once you've got them in just their skin they're pure woman... and every bit as beautiful as someone who lives in spandex shorts and a t-shirt. At the end of the day it all comes down to how much wrapping paper you like on your birthday present
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    I'm not a fan of the burqa (read: niqaab) either, but a lot of Western work to emancipate women from other cultures is done via the angle of painting men in said countries as savages who must be defeated by the Enlightened White Man; this perspective is ********.

    The recent French ban on the burkini for example, failed to take into account the agency of women; it mirrors the oppressive patriarchal thinking - top-down control over women's clothing. It has nothing to do with "liberating" women, as the French Supreme Court was able to recognise and overturn the ban.

    It reminds me of the colonial mentality: Both the British in India and the Americans in Afghanistan made women’s clothing and gender crimes into signatures of an alien and barbaric culture. Moral campaigns against such ‘offensive’ practices are in reality sophisticated imperial technologies of control. For populations ‘at home,’ bare-breasted Hindu women and burqa-clad Afghan women become convenient emblems of both strangeness and the need for corrective conquest. When the Hindu woman puts on a long-sleeved blouse and a petticoat, or when an Afghan woman throws off her burqa, it equals conquest and success of the colonial venture.

    The singling out of gendered crimes, sati in India and honour killings in Afghanistan, dramatises the otherness of the Hindu or Afghan male. He becomes an indigenous evil requiring heroic foreign intervention. The sophistication of this kind of enemy-making is that it renders one half of the local population – the victims of these crimes – allies of the occupation. Actual Hindu widows and Afghan women are rarely, if ever, heard from, as their experiences and perspective might complicate a silence that the Anglo-American empire can imagine as gratitude.

    If the niqaab were to be banned here, the opposition would mainly consist of Muslim women, not men.
    This is true, the reasoning provided by French authorities was BS.

    I think the only way we will see the end of control of women's dress and bodies through religion is through careful education of both girls and boys in schools.

    There is a problem in religious women believing that they are making their own decision and have their own opinions about their own bodies. If it's not obvious enough to anyone from the outside, I grew up in a Christian family and can confirm for you that you really are not making your own decisions and you certainly are not finding freedom in subjecting yourself to the will of God.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I fully support the ban.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    I personally think the idea of the banning of the burqa is a joke. Just to assume all Muslim women are oppressed because they cover their faces I extremely shallow and ignorant. It is a basic right for these women to wear what they want and by even just contemplating banning the burqa we are feeding into the divide that groups such as IS and so on want to cause between Muslim communities and the rest of the world. For security reasons and so on, yes is understandable however you can't complain that these people are coming over and don't want to intergrate and inform to British way of life when the British way of life does not include forcing people to do what they don't want to do and stripping them of their human rights, in that sense we are no worse that IS
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by leavingthecity)
    This is true, the reasoning provided by French authorities was BS.

    I think the only way we will see the end of control of women's dress and bodies through religion is through careful education of both girls and boys in schools.

    There is a problem in religious women believing that they are making their own decision and have their own opinions about their own bodies. If it's not obvious enough to anyone from the outside, I grew up in a Christian family and can confirm for you that you really are not making your own decisions and you certainly are not finding freedom in subjecting yourself to the will of God.
    I think you're absolutely right on the importance of education; I believe schools and other education institutions should have mandatory programmes where vulnerable groups are taught about their basic human rights and what to do if they're violated either at home or elsewhere.

    With regards to not finding freedom in obeying God's will, I think that's more of a personal philosophical perspective that is probably beyond the scope of political didcussions concerning law and liberty. But yes, despite our aversion to the niqaab, I think it's good that we agree on preserving liberty (to some extent).
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    I think they would argue the purpose is VERY import

    But one is a work uniform one is a fashion choice so no they are not comparable or equal in this respect

    comparable would be balaclava but that's about it (even a helmet has a safety function)
    The purpose is quite arbitrary and subjective. You consider the wearing of the burqa as just a fashion choice whilst the muslim women who wear them may consider it a religious obligation. Some may consider a religious obligation equal to that of a work uniform, or even above, but all this is subjective and opinionated.

    The purpose is unimportant in the sense that it will always be subjective, so trying to find a purpose for certain things such as a burqa is futile.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Also worth bearing in mind that the full habit is essentially ceremonial wear, worn during services, religious duties, etc. Most of the time, many nuns wear regular clothes.
    Here is a picture of some nuns.


    And some more.
    Yeah that's fine, they can wear whatever they want for whatever reasons. It's none of my business what they wear on a daily basis, I'm not Gok Wan.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobML)
    As much as the "alt-right" (nothing but empty contrarianism) like to insist, memes don't have a place in proper discussion
    as if proper discussions happen on TSR
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    To everybody claiming that people are free to wear what they want, etc., do you know that the Public Order Act of 1936 is still in use? It bans the use of "political uniform" in "any public place": http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...6/1/6/contents

    This act was voted to fight the British Union of Fascists whose supporters wore black shirts. Paul Golding, the leader of Britain First, was indeed fined for wearing a political uniform last year: http://www.essexlive.news/britain-le...ail/story.html

    Britain First is glad to know that TSR support their right to wear what they want against the oppression of the British government.

    This act could be used against the burqa as it is advocated by the Shariah, which is a kind of political code.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I watched the Prisoner of Azkaban on shrooms and to this day my heart races when ever I see a niqab.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The state has no business policing people's choice of clothing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DicksOut4Haraam)
    The state has no business policing people's choice of clothing.
    I don't think covering your face should be legal, there's freedom then there's religious over-privilege.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Jack)
    It's not an argument, it is a view.
    And how does this view add anything interesting to the discussion? It's like if there was a discussion about gun control, and your input was "I don't see what the problem is, I think guns look cool".

    It's just a pointless, vacuous thing to say.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

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.