Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    danglenister - what? most of you just use this as an excuse to blather on about how 'britain is OUR country' and how people should 'conform to our moral standards'. sounds alot like the manifesto of the BNP...i couldnt give a **** what other people do. its a round world, we all live on the same globe, nothing makes this or any other country special.

    oh and you are teh funny. closet irony. what a f'in hoot you are. har har har.

    i'm a very hard atheist but do i preach about how all religion is wrong? of course not. i just feel you all use this type of thing to preach against any religion that isn't 'english' and use it as an excuse. which you are.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nik87)
    danglenister - what? most of you just use this as an excuse to blather on about how 'britain is OUR country' and how people should 'conform to our moral standards'. sounds alot like the manifesto of the BNP...i couldnt give a **** what other people do. its a round world, we all live on the same globe, nothing makes this or any other country special.

    oh and you are teh funny. closet irony. what a f'in hoot you are. har har har.

    i'm a very hard atheist but do i preach about how all religion is wrong? of course not. i just feel you all use this type of thing to preach against any religion that isn't 'english' and use it as an excuse. which you are.
    Right here we go:

    If I say I dont like full-face covering it doesn't insult those that do it, much the same as it doesn't insult cheese lovers if I say I dont like cheese.

    Britain is my country.. it is also the country of many muslims. I have a right to an opinion as much as they do. I don't like any form of facial covering whilst talking to someone - I have the same opinion if someone were to talk to me with a balaclava on, a motorcycle helmet on or a hoody up. It is general courtesy in this country to take your hat off when indoors.. much like it is general etiquette to talk to someone face-to-face with nothing to hide expression.

    I am not saying that religion is wrong - but there is a line that has to be enforced. I do not preach against these religions, I do not tell them how to dress, how to act or what morals they should hold. I apply my morals to the situation and state my opinion.

    You have a shallow mind if you think that every opinion someone has is insulting someone else. If you were right, how would we get laws enforced??

    Politician 1:"We should make a law to prevent hacking"
    Poltician 2: "Erm, sorry you cant do that you anti-hackerist"

    :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    you know nothing about politics do you...

    and yes you are telling these religions how to dress. you've stated it many times...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nik87)
    you know nothing about politics do you...

    and yes you are telling these religions how to dress. you've stated it many times...
    How many times?? And when?? LOL

    Have you actually read this thread?

    You are trying to stamp political correctness on this thread when it is not needed. People have opinions and we are expressing ours - you are attempting to say that your views are better than mine and many others in this thread.

    Again I must say.. hint of irony anyone?? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    In a lot of other countries in the world people who travel there are expected to follow or at least respect some of the rulings/traditions/beliefs etc that they hold. This could extend to women covering their head, taking your shoes off to enter a building, women not wearing short skirts etc. You are visting that country and most people would try and respect that. I am inclined to believe that similar should happen here, when people make the decision to move to England they know that there will be differences in cultures, beliefs etc. I am not saying that people should have to change their culture or beliefs but they should respect the exsisting (and probably predominate) beliefs that already exsist in that country.

    What I am trying to say is that for example in this case, surely the women in question should be willing to comprimise in effect and wear just a head scarf (don't know the proper name) rather than the full veil. She would be willing to accept that esp for the job she wants to do then it is not pratical to wear it. It is not normal practice for people to cover virtually all of their face in this country, when you have to remove motorcycle helmets to enter a petrol station, chavs are being stopped from wearing hoodies etc all of which cover part of the face it doesn't seem right that it is ok for one group to have another set of 'rules.'

    Slightly different point, I have a bracelet which is very special to me, it was a present from someone who means a lot and I wear it all the time. When I was at school I wasn't allowed to wear it, I had to take it off as it was classed as jewellry which they said was dangerous to wear in science, PE etc. So I had to take it off, (since I left school I have never taken it off in nearly 5 years it means so much to me.) But others at schools were allowed to wear various forms of religious 'jewellry' without a problem - surely following the previous logic that is also dangerous? It often seems very much that there are always several sets of 'rules' as people are always too worried about being perceived as being racist or anti-muslim or whatever rather than looking at the logic of each point/case.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cathie86)
    In a lot of other countries in the world people who travel there are expected to follow or at least respect some of the rulings/traditions/beliefs etc that they hold. This could extend to women covering their head, taking your shoes off to enter a building, women not wearing short skirts etc. You are visting that country and most people would try and respect that. I am inclined to believe that similar should happen here, when people make the decision to move to England they know that there will be differences in cultures, beliefs etc. I am not saying that people should have to change their culture or beliefs but they should respect the exsisting (and probably predominate) beliefs that already exsist in that country.

    .
    Exactly, totally agree!

    When I went on holiday to Africa a few years back, we were informed by the travel agent before we went that the area we would be staying in was a Muslim area and we were advised that when visiting the main local/shopping areas, that us women would need to cover our shoulders and wear adequate clothing. Being in a foreign country with different beliefs, we were willing to do that and respected that.

    Personally I dont like the niqab (is that the full face one, correct me if Im wrong?). I have seen women driving wearing it, and I often wonder how they can see anything properly! I have spoken to Muslim women wearing this and I must admit I do find it very difficult to understand women when they are talking. If a grown adult can, Im sure a child would too.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joystar*)
    Exactly, totally agree!

    When I went on holiday to Africa a few years back, we were informed by the travel agent before we went that the area we would be staying in was a Muslim area and we were advised that when visiting the main local/shopping areas, that us women would need to cover our shoulders and wear adequate clothing. Being in a foreign country with different beliefs, we were willing to do that and respected that.
    Which country did you go to btw?

    Personally I dont like the niqab (is that the full face one, correct me if Im wrong?). I have seen women driving wearing it, and I often wonder how they can see anything properly! I have spoken to Muslim women wearing this and I must admit I do find it very difficult to understand women when they are talking. If a grown adult can, Im sure a child would too.
    Yep that's the one - niqab = face veil. Ironically the only 2 i've heard speak (for a while, i don't think i've conversed with others or i can't remember if i have) had voices that were as sweet as honey!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nik87)
    danglenister - what? most of you just use this as an excuse to blather on about how 'britain is OUR country' and how people should 'conform to our moral standards'. sounds alot like the manifesto of the BNP...i couldnt give a **** what other people do. its a round world, we all live on the same globe, nothing makes this or any other country special.
    What makes Saudi Arabia, for example, special? Should we start taking our summer holidays out in Mecca; shipping out a few crates of lager, porn and Salman Rushdie books, lounging around in our shorts or bikinis?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    To return to a point raised in the ethnic minority quotas for police thread and the lets fine everyone associated with the BNP threads.

    Should the LEA be perfectly free to fire for this?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i'm expressing my opinion, simple as that. it just seems you can't accept it.

    and yes, saudi arabia is not special. ship out all the lager you want to it, i couldnt care less...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I was asked to do an essay about Jack straws views on wearing veils for AS communication studies. In relation to him saying that wearing a veil and not seeing someone visually prevents ceommunication, i wrote;



    Part of me agrees with Jack Straws opinions about Muslim ladies wearing a full veil only leaving the eyes exposed and the other part strongly disagrees. From viewing the statement the first thing I thought was that not all communication has to be verbal. Jack Straw seems to think that only interaction with humans has to be of a verbal nature. Jack Straw believes that wearing a full veil is a barrier to communication, so is it fair to say he believes that anyone with visual or verbal barriers can’t communicate affectively? What about blind or death people? Some could argue that they also have barriers in their lives, but communicating shouldn’t be one. Sign language and Braille are effective ways in which they can communicate; another good example of non verbal communication is paralanguage [body language] a number of visually/verbally impaired people have to learn these skills in order to communicate. So if they were to try and talk to Jack Straw, using these skills [e.g. sign language] then it would be him who has the barrier as he doesn’t understand these skills, therefore completely contradicting himself.

    There has also been a story recently about a Muslim teacher who was fired from her profession because she was wearing a veil in class while teaching. You may think this is a form of discrimination but it has emerged she was fired because her pupils couldn’t understand her and therefore couldn’t communicate properly while at school. Could this then be an example of what Jack Straw is discussing?

    Language is a complex system of signs that is mainly composed of symbols. What Jack Straw is suggesting is that if people can’t be seen visually then its harder for us to encode and decode information. I would agree that by wearing a veil it would be hard to understand the person’s semantics of the language. Even though semantics is usually linked with meanings of text it can also be applied with verbal speech. For example, if someone is wearing a veil then you can’t see their facial expressions, facial expressions are often used to express meanings and emotions, although one could argue that the person could use other prosodic features to express themselves for example, paralinguistic’s and tone of voice.

    If I were to agree with Jack Straws views then I could argue that non-verbal communication usually serves to reinforce what a person says and sometimes the non-verbal actions can contradict the meaning of the verbal message. Without the core verbal communication it is impossible to properly understand someone and if someone covers their mouth and face this blocks this verbal and visual message. As humans we use our language creatively and sophistically, e.g. telling lies, talking about the past and the future. If someone is covering up their face could they also be covering their creative communication? Also if a person is covering their face is can mean that they are shy or don’t want to talk [e.g. using hands] this can put people off talking to you even if it’s unintentional.

    Language also forms parts of out culture, gender and sex; one could argue that by wearing the veil she is expressing all 3 of these, especially her culture, Muslim. Although someone could also argue that she is not expressing these through her language, only her appearance. I believe that it’s the persons own personal choice whether to communicate through their language or appearance, or both.

    Dale Spencer argues that language reflects that dominance of men in our society. Perhaps a Muslim woman covers herself because she feels oppressed by men or even is trying to stop this oppression of woman as sex symbols by covering herself.

    Non verbal communication consists of a number of non verbal signals that people transmit intentionally or not. Muslim ladies could communication using their proxemics or orientation these are formed by our cultural experiences and social attitudes. So in conclusion I disagree that a Muslim lady can’t communicate properly by wearing a veil, because there is a number of ways in which humans communicate, but I do agree that the verbal communication and see the person you’re talking to are important in communication successfully.


    700 words.


    A survey in the Guardian newspaper suggested 53% of people supported Mr Straw in thinking the veils create a barrier between Muslims and other people.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    What about blind or death people?
    Deaf people love, what, are we talking about the undead, aaaaah!


    Love the essay, i do agree that facial expressions could be a key part of language however there is also tone of voice to think about.

    It is very interesting to see how tone of voice and facial exporessions could change a phrase.

    For example

    I can't believe it could mean either, i can't believe i won something, i can't believe what you have done etc. Language is a funny thing
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i believe that the comments that jack straw made wer damn right ignorant, to openly ridicule a common custom of muslim women, which he knew was going to kick a fuss in the muslim world, was very stupid especially since hes a man in power and since he doesnt have a gud trak record with the muslims-iraq illegal war!!!!!!!!!!. he should have known saying something like thiswould start a media frenzy. i believe that people should wear whatever they want, who are you or me to say that they are wrong. i know plenty of women who wear the niqaab and who are very social and do not make relations with other societies difficult. its not a form of oppression, most women do against their husbands or brother, fathers will. it is a personal statement if they want to wear it they should. has anyone had the decency to go and ask muslim women about their opinion rather than telling them to get used to british customs??? i understand peoples opinions about them not being able to see the face, it is hard to make out what the persons expressions are, and yes it would be hard for children sometimes to understand what the teacher or assisstant in this case is saying (ie if she was angry) but you have to understand thatif a male walked into the room when the lady was uncovered it would be infringement of her religious rules, also this media coverage of this particular case has been disgraceful, she wasnt a teacher but an assisstant and to sack someone, telling her she cannot do her job because of her religious beliefs is discrimination!!!!!!! leave muslims alone, stop picking on one faith just because of 9/11, and why dont you talk about the millions of innocent lives lost in iraq, afghanistan, palestine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .... instead of wasting your time on about whether a grown woman should wear what she wants and not be sacked about it!!!!!!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cjmcnair)
    Hang on a minute, double standards...:

    "But Ms Azmi later admitted she had taken the veil off to be interviewed for the job by a male governor. "

    (Original post by WokSz)
    that is very hypocritical.
    Get your facts right
    1) She wasn't told her int was with a man so she didn't wear a veil
    2) She was willing to take her veil off in the classrom

    Personally I think she should show her face to her students. I think she may end up being forced to in a long legal case.

    I also do not think it was a coincidence with Jack Straw making his comments when he did - incase he was thinking of his leadership bid - but this might blow out of proportion and backfire, lol

    Also it says she is an ASSISTANT - so the normal teacher must have been OK with it (or maybe not and reported her)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nik87)
    there's quite a lot of closet racism here....

    i personally feel that the woman in question HAS been untruthful etc. and so probably shouldnt be allowed to teach as she misled the interviewer. HOWEVER, i don't think we should make other religions conform to our standards, just because its 'our' (ahem... round earth people...) land. just as i wouldnt willingly follow other practices in other countries...
    So, we do the other thing. We conform to their standards. Which doesn't really make any sense given proportionality of numbers...although this is already the case.

    We have to be 'accomodating'...which actually means licking arse.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jojo72)
    Get your facts right
    1) She wasn't told her int was with a man so she didn't wear a veil
    2) She was willing to take her veil off in the classrom
    If she didn't wear a veil to her interview as she didn't know she would be interviewed by a man that is up to her - but is not someone elses problem because she wasn't told that her interviewer would be male. Theres a 50/50 chance she was going to be interviewed by a male (or maybe even a panel so a male and a female etc.) But the fact that she didn't wear it for the interview would have meant that there were no questions raised in the interviewers mind about any potential problems - then she then starts wearing it later, when she has got the job.

    Also, it says (part way down) in the news article that she refused to remove the veil and was suspended pending an employment tribunal. But it also says in the article that she said she would remove the veil but not in front of male colleagues. Which is it?

    Another point, as is often the case with these type of 'political correctness' type of debates, how many children/teachers/parents had problems understanding her but didn't say anything because they were worried about being called racist etc because of it. I raised an issue at college with a maths teacher we had who was foreign (can't remember the nationality) and the majority, if not all the class struggled to understand her explanations, I was told by my tutor not to take it further as I was risking being disciplined under college regualtions for racist comments and they eventually swapped my classes for me. Chances are there are many similar cases where people havn't spoken out or have but been shut up allowing situations to continue which aren't right just for the sake of trying to avoid upsetting people.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i have a spanish uni lecturer and i cope fine...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    i have a spanish uni lecturer and i cope fine...
    What's that got to do with the price of fish?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    some whiner was complaining that they couldnt understand a foreign teacher. i'm saying its not difficult at all.

    i'm completly against PC, religion and whatever else. i believe in free choice for all. if she wants to wear her religious dress, let her. she's been hired, end of story. (interesting cartoon in the times today, satirising the people against her as KKK members...). if i ever travel to a muslim country, i'm not going to conform to their religious dress code because i think its all bull. i have no problem with other people wearing it though.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Cathie86]If she didn't wear a veil to her interview as she didn't know she would be interviewed by a man that is up to her - but is not someone elses problem because she wasn't told that her interviewer would be male. Theres a 50/50 chance she was going to be interviewed by a male (or maybe even a panel so a male and a female etc.) But the fact that she didn't wear it for the interview would have meant that there were no questions raised in the interviewers mind about any potential problems - then she then starts wearing it later, when she has got the job.

    [QUOTE]

    I don't dispute - my main argument with my original reply was that the post I was replying to was misleading.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
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.