It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Women who wear burkas on the street in France face fines of £700

page: 11
21
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
yep, you are right re the nuns' reasoning- main point I was making was at least we know the nuns are not being coerced or oppressed (unless you view them as voluntarily oppressing themselves), as they are pretty free from male involvement

The same cannot be said for these women dressed as beekeepers in the Islamic community................


You're right there.

We know that various levels of covering are strictly enforced in several Muslim countries, yet people would have us believe that wearing the burka in France has suddenly become a sign of freedom.

Obviously this is not the case.


In France, according to journalist Jane Kramer, veiling among school girls became increasingly common following the 9/11 Attack of 2001, due to coercion by "fathers and uncles and brothers and even their male classmates" of the school girls. "Girls who did not conform were excoriated, or chased, or beaten by fanatical young men meting out `Islamic justice.`" [32] According to the American magazine The Weekly Standard, a survey conducted in France in May 2003 reportedly "found that 77% of girls wearing the hijab said they did so because of physical threats from Islamist groups." [33]

en.wikipedia.org...


We are being told Muslim girls want to do this to show they are good, modest Muslims. But many Muslim girls are being told by coercive males that not wearing Islamic covering shows they are not good, modest Muslims.
We all know the power of family and peer group. And we know many Muslim men want their women to cover up.

We also know people need sun on their naked skin in order to stay healthy. So making excessive covering illegal is not denying freedom to Muslim women, it is protecting their freedom to be healthy and comfortable and to become part of the society in which they are living.

The tradition to keep one's women covered predates Islam. It comes from a time when women were property. Men protected their property by locking their women away or forcing them to keep covered in public. This was not done out of caring for the women. It was done to keep them in captivity so the man could be certain the children born to his women were all his own. - It's quite logical from an evolutionary standpoint, but we hope society has progressed since those days.

These days women are no longer property, despite the attitudes of those who believe honour killings can be justified. However men who have been raised in a culture which despises women who dress scantily, go out on their own or with dates, and who live independently with no man to supervise them, are having trouble coping with feminine freedom.

Perhaps some of them even believe men have uncontrollable urges which are inflamed by the sight of feminine skin or hair. However the inbred contempt for women who "expose themselves" is responsible for 100s of murders and mutilations in the Islamic world. We've seen that in this thread, with some males trying to relate not wearing burkas to prostitution, as if one topic has any relevance to the other.

The real danger to women is not their own clothing, it's the hate-filled violence of people who have been taught Western-style women deserve this treatment.

Naturally many women who have been brought up with these attitudes will "choose" the traditional coverings for themselves, and, as obedient sufferers of Stockholm Syndrome, they will tell themselves it really, really is what they really do want to do.




posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 



Naturally many women who have been brought up with these attitudes will "choose" the traditional coverings for themselves, and, as obedient sufferers of Stockholm Syndrome, they will tell themselves it really, really is what they really do want to do.


Very good post...I totally agree with every word.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Yes indeed, Morocco is a great place with a wonderful people.

Peace friend



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
It is definitely about responsibility, I completely agree. I do, however, feel that personal responsibility is often brushed aside. Here is an example. My sister in law was recently in her Palestinian town in Israel (Muslim town, mostly) she dresses very conservatively but does not wear hijab. She went to a restaurant with her sister who does wear hijab and they were eating ice cream. Some guy (they do not know him, just some random Palestinian guy) come up behind them and says how he wishes he was the ice cream, so she slapped him across his face. It turned into this whole big situation because she slapped him and embarrassed him (poor baby) it took a few weeks for things to calm down his family wanted some sort of retribution from her family, which they were not willing to do because of what he said. The guys family knew what he did, but refused to believe that he deserved to be embarrassed and that the whole situation was her fault. Neither he nor his family was willing to responsibility for his actions, which were completely unacceptable.

I have absolutely zero problem with a woman wearing hijab, it is her right to do so, or not as she feels compelled to do. What I do have a problem with is any person in a public place that in completely unidentifiable. In this day, it is not possible to risk the security of all because someone wants to go over and beyond what may be religiously required. If the woman believes she must wear hijab that is acceptable within this law, only niqaab and the burka would be banned, the same way that that I am not allowed to wear a ski mask into a public place (other than the slopes). People need to be identifiable. The nun argument doesn't apply here because a nuns face in visible, same as in a hijab and that is allowed.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Wendroid
 



"O Prophet, tell your wives and daughters and the believing women to draw their outer garments around them (when they go out or are among men). That is better in order that they may be known (to be Muslims) and not annoyed..." (Qur'an 33:59)


So the implication is that if a woman is not Muslim, then it is OK to "annoy" her?

What kind of frickin religion is that? You expect us to respect that?
Please do give me a break. As I said before, I am all for modesty, but to say that such behaviour from men is to be expected and tolerated is ridiculous.

I am a man. I do not do that, no matter what religion a woman is, or how clad or unclad she may be. Your sense of what is right is really screwed up.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by December_Rain

Originally posted by project_aurora
Geez this annoys me. what about nuns wearing traditional nun gear :/


They will also be banned under French Authoritarian rules shortly.


Wrong! Traditional nun outfits do not totally conceal identity.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
www.javno.com...


VIOLATING ISLAMIC CULTURE? Somalia Islamists detain dozens of beardless men Religious police from Somalia's Al Qaeda-inspired Shebab group arrested and jailed dozens of men for shaving their beards, officals said.

.MOGADISHU, January 8, 2010 (AFP) - Religious police from Somalia's Al Qaeda-inspired Shebab group arrested and jailed dozens of men in the southern city of Kismayo for shaving their beards, officials said Friday.

The clean-shaven men, mostly students in their twenties, were picked up during a raid on Thursday evening for violating a decree made by the Shebab administration in December ordering all men to grow a beard.

"Our units in charge of enforcing good religious practice arrested dozens of residents for shaving their beards, which is banned by the regional Islamic state," local police commander Sheikh Abu Hureyra Abdurahman told reporters.

"They will remain in jail for three days as a punishment for violating Islamic culture, they will be released after that," the police chief said.

Kismayo is Somalia's main southern harbour. Since 2008, it has been under the control of the Shebab, a group whose leader last year proclaimed his allegiance to Osama bin Laden.

"Everybody in town is growing a beard nowadays, if you don't you go to jail for shaving," Muktar Daneyste, a Kismayo resident, told AFP.

"One of my friends is among six people arrested in a teashop yesterday. Some had trimmed beards and others were clean shaven," he said.

The Shebab administration in Kismayo and other parts of southern and central Somalia has imposed a very strict form of Sharia Islamic law -- banning foreign culture and imposing a dress code on both men and women.


I thought I would post this to show how there inforcing there coultrue on people in there country, Why not do the same when they come here.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by wayno
 


Exactly, nor would the traditional hijab.

Clarification for some posters seems necessary: Niqaab and the burka would be banned under this law, not hijab (the head scarf that covers the hair). These two garments completely conceal the face except the eyes on the niqaab are exposed, on the burka there is a shield even over the eyes making them not visible to others. These two items completely conceal the identity of those wearing them. The purpose of this potential law is not to marginal Islam or the beliefs of some Muslims. But let's be honest there are more women participating in attacks and there have been some instances of men wearing them to gain access for attacks. These items are worn by a fraction of Muslimeenas even within Muslim theocracies therefore the world does not view it as a requirement of the religion. Yes, before someone argues back yes I know Saudi women wear it (niqaab) in public at all times and yes I know it is also by law.

So.....can we end the nun/Muslim comparision as it holds no water?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by searching4truth

It is definitely about responsibility, I completely agree. I do, however, feel that personal responsibility is often brushed aside. Here is an example. My sister in law was recently in her Palestinian town in Israel (Muslim town, mostly) she dresses very conservatively but does not wear hijab. She went to a restaurant with her sister who does wear hijab and they were eating ice cream. Some guy (they do not know him, just some random Palestinian guy) come up behind them and says how he wishes he was the ice cream, so she slapped him across his face. It turned into this whole big situation because she slapped him and embarrassed him (poor baby) it took a few weeks for things to calm down his family wanted some sort of retribution from her family, which they were not willing to do because of what he said. The guys family knew what he did, but refused to believe that he deserved to be embarrassed and that the whole situation was her fault. Neither he nor his family was willing to responsibility for his actions, which were completely unacceptable.


Wasn't her response of slapping him an unnecessary act of violence? What he said was wrong, but don't you think her response to physically assault him was a bad decision? She could have handled the situation a lot better than resorting to violence in a culture where violence against women is condoned.

[edit on 10/1/2010 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dark Ghost


Wasn't her response of slapping him an unnecessary act of violence? What he said was wrong, but don't you think her response to physically assault him was a bad decision? She could have handled the situation a lot better than resorting to violence in a culture where violence against women is condoned.

[edit on 10/1/2010 by Dark Ghost]


Yes, hindsight is always 20/20 and hitting a stranger (or a familiar for that matter) isn't advisable however in her case it was an instant reaction and not something she thought over at all she was born and raised in the US (just there for the summer).



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by serbsta
 


If you want to live in a different country, adapt to their rules. Otherwise, do not live there.

How would middle eastern countries adapt to western rules? Answer: THEY WOULD NOT.

So, why should western countries adapt to their rules? Answer: THEY SHOULD NOT.

Because they are trying to overtake.

Wake up, western countries!



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by searching4truth
Yes, hindsight is always 20/20 and hitting a stranger (or a familiar for that matter) isn't advisable however in her case it was an instant reaction and not something she thought over at all she was born and raised in the US (just there for the summer).


Sorry, friend, but that is not a plausible excuse. You have to take responsibility for your own actions and her reaction to the comments directed at her were silly. It doesn't matter where she was born, it matters where she was at the time and what actions she took while at that place.

Maybe her home town (US) has convinced her that assaulting males is acceptable behaviour, but that might not be the case in the Palestinian territories where she was at the time.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   
For me banning the burka is the start of eroding personal rights, headscarf and burka are about the same thing, modesty, the difference being that a woman who wears a burka wants to save her beauty for her husband. When a person WANTS do something which isn't hurting anyone else, isn't it opressive to say they can't?

I know that in a lot of Muslim countrys ARE oppressive with their attitude towards a lot of things, but that is the fault of people applying the Qu'ran in a bespotic way and that can be done with any religion and we're not talking about a Muslim country, we're talking about France.

What makes my PMSL laughing about this is that the last time I was in Paris I was wondering around passage Brady and the surrounding back-streets, there where loads of prostitutes hanging around in neon coloured batty riders (and not much else) miles of bubbly cellulite flapping in the wind and no-one batted an eye-lid! Lol!

Personally I believe that if you should be free to do what you want if your nor hurting anyone in the process, I'm with Einstein....

As long as I have any choice, I will stay only in a country where political liberty, toleration, and equality of all citizens before the law are the rule.
Albert Einstein



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Wendroid
 


Talking about civil rights and wearing the burka in one breath - what?

Do you think those women chose to wear it?

No, the men told them to, and still tell them to - that is not civil rights.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:12 AM
link   
They way I see it is if I, witch to the core, can't go naked carrying around my broom in public, then they can't wear burkas in public.
Society has expectations and guidelines. Why should they get more freedom to practice their religion than me?

Ye shall be naked in your rites, all acts of pleasure are my rituals...

And those airport officials....if they get to look at me naked, do I get to see their junk first? Guess I'll be takin the broom and not the plane...



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by learningtofly
 


The thing is, women tend to want to be DESIRABLE, they want to be pleasing to men, they generally want to be good wives, mothers - this is how a woman earns respect AS A WOMAN in the most basic way.
So mothers will teach their daughters to wear a burka if that is what the men expect of women - mothers do not want their daughters to be seen as immodest or 'bad girls' or immoral.

In this way, oppression is often passed down as cultural values.
It is mothers who take the girls for the female circumcision. They do love their daughters, they want the best for them. Not only do they not know other ways, but other ways have never been shown to them as being acceptable for women.

The danger with legislation like this is that it may force some women to be homebound, as they will not be allowed out or will be ashamed to go out, without the total covering.

But, this sort of oppression is a powerful meme, society has a right to set limits on it, so that it does not spread. If the clear majority of France's women are horrified that they might ever have the burka forced on them - then I think it is ok for France to do this in public.

Clearly most people would be horrified if my fat butt walked around in public. That's why it is illegal.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by learningtofly
reply to post by Wendroid
 


Talking about civil rights and wearing the burka in one breath - what?

Do you think those women chose to wear it?

No, the men told them to, and still tell them to - that is not civil rights.


To say that all women are being forced to wear burkas is fascicle. Aside from religious reasons, some Women wear it because it keeps you cool and keeps the sand out of their eyes. I can imagen its pretty good at keeping you warm too!


reply to post by hadriana
 


Thought witches where skyclad in rituals, not getting on planes. At least no-one could say your hiding any explosives!

If you want to go about nekkid Hadriana, go for it, start a petition, fight for your rights, just understand that burqa wearing women are at the opposite end of the spectrum to you and it's always good have some-one who challenges our view-point, Challenges make us grow, to much sameness makes us stale. Seeing the opposite of what we are is a great teacher of tolerance. Something that painfully lacking in this world, amoughst ALL peoples.

Remember I said earlier " I know there is nothing in the Qu'ran that states you must wear burqa or hijab" but if somebody WANTS to, who am I to say they can't? The only person I aim to control is myself, the only time I'd say "Oi, you, NO!" is in defence of another and although I can see that you people are trying to do this because, lets face it, Islam is being used to oppress loads of people around the world, don't forget that some people choose to follow and just as I would stand up for the woman who doesn't want to wear the burqa, I would stand up for those who do.

If we can't embrace the rainbow of Humanity what chance do the Aliens have with us?

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Is there a law in France against wearing a cross, the star of David, or the funny little hat Jewish guys use? How about turbans, Buddha medallions or white wrist bands?

If not, the it seems highly hipocritical....



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by hadriana
reply to post by learningtofly
 


In this way, oppression is often passed down as cultural values.
It is mothers who take the girls for the female circumcision. They do love their daughters, they want the best for them. Not only do they not know other ways, but other ways have never been shown to them as being acceptable for women.


This is very true and very sad, I watched a programme where a grandmother was going to mutilate her grand daughter in this way and for no other reason than 'because it has always been done'. Even how I'm being moved to tears.

but this isn't the mutilation of woman, this is about what they're WEARING.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.chowk.com...

How many of us wear clothes made by children in sweat-shops? *Looks @self in Primark leggings* Thats more oppressive in my book.

[edit on 10-1-2010 by Wendroid]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I personally do not care if a woman wants to make a statement of whatever kind by wearing clothing that completely conceals her. However, there must be, for public safety, limits. She/he must reveal her/his face to officials such as police or public bureaucrats when seeking services.

Their drivers license or picture ID would have to be with face revealed; etc. etc. They should not be allowed to drive a vehicle with the total covering that limits peripheral vision.

There is a limit beyond which it becomes idiotic to suggest modesty trumps public safety or anytime when there is a real and true need to be be able to visually identify someone.

If he or she is so honestly concerned with modesty (or his/her spouse is) then the person should never leave the confines of their home.

And yes, I use he/she to underscore the ridiculousness of this issue.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join