Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ricky D
Trad climber
Sierra Westside
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:01pm PT
|
The French like body hair - so exposed female mustaches will also be a hit.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:09pm PT
|
Norway prohibited the wearing of hijabs (scarf covering all but face) and niqab (face also covered) about two weeks ago, at least in public. About 2% of those living in Norway are Muslim, with more than half living in the greater Oslo area. The ban on such face-coverings also includes those traditionally worn by some Sami ("Lapps") in the north.
This debate is interesting in that until not long ago, married women in much of Europe by custom wore simple head scarves. Nothing like a hijab or niqab, but even less than a century ago, 'decent' married women wore a scarf in public. My mother's mother, from a city in northern Germany, always did so. It's much less of a custom than it was, but if you go back several centuries, you'd find that it was a custom that nearly had the force of law. Many traditional European costumes still include scarves or other headwear for women.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:09pm PT
|
It's about time....Maybe we should too.
I was sitting in a Fish Market reataurant and watched as 3 or 4 women passed my wife and I in full hijabs.
It really disgusted me. It should be shunned. Who treats women like that!!!! In this country!!!!
EDIT:
This debate is interesting in that until not long ago, married women in much of Europe by custom wore simple head scarves. Nothing like a hijab or niqab, but even less than a century ago, 'decent' married women wore a scarf in public.
Anders, maybe because they are attempting to use our laws against us. They're pushing Sharia on us. F*#k them! Go home, Sharia don't roll here...
|
|
Rock!...oopsie.
Trad climber
the pitch above you
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:17pm PT
|
Uh, Bluering... some women WANT to wear them. You want the government to tell them they can't? Who treats women like that? Ya know all this government regulation seems like something a repub like you would not want to endorse?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:26pm PT
|
Uh, Bluering... some women WANT to wear them.
You mean, want to wear them or have their throats cut????
In this country we DO have certain freedoms to dress certain ways, but even France recognizes that it's a public security risk to have people walking around in sheets.
Suicide bombers have repeatedly used this weakness in our society and have exploited it.
What if I 'choose' to enter a gov't building with may face fully covered and my religion disallows me removing it???
Would you accept that? No! If you want to live here, you live by OUR LAWS, not some crap out of the 14th century. That's ridiculous and you pull our society backwards.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:31pm PT
|
Umm, Bluering, just to be clear - women in much of Europe, until not long ago, had to wear scarves by compelling social custom. That custom (and for all I know law, in some places) was largely a creation of Christianity, most of the various brands of which didn't have a high opinion of women, and so wanted them to be modest.
Many religions tend not to be very comfortable with women and all they represent, e.g. sexuality.
Another example is some brands of particularly orthodox Jews, even in the U.S.A., which have strong customs about women's clothing and head-coverings. And of course Mormons have their own ideas about such things.
I agree that requiring women to clothe (or not clothe) themselves in a particular way is abhorrent, beyond minimal requirements for decency in public places. But it should apply to all religions and places, and we shouldn't forget the origins of such customs.
Edit: I don't know that there have been any Muslim women suicide bombers in the US, at all. There have been in Iraq and Afghanistan.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:35pm PT
|
It should be banned.
As is beating on women.
Being forced to wear a stupid veil, or being ashamed to show one's face in public, is obvious evidence of abuse.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:35pm PT
|
Anders, quit being disengenuous!!!!
You know the differences here. My grandmother used to wear a silly headcovering, or simple scarf where you still see the face. It's different than a f*#king burqa!!!!
A full-facial headcovering ain't right!!!!
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:37pm PT
|
Not happening here. Please See 1st amendment.
Sure, the guv can make people expose their faces for drivers license photos or whatever but a ban would be stricken immediately.
It's a free country.
|
|
Rock!...oopsie.
Trad climber
the pitch above you
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:40pm PT
|
That's ridiculous and you pull our society backwards.
Nope, actually, ignorance and intolerance pull our society backwards.
it's a public security risk to have people walking around in sheets.
Plenty of minority folks in this country would certainly agree. Didn't ban it then... why now?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:41pm PT
|
Not happening here. Please See 1st amendment.
Exactly why 7th or 14th century Islam may be incompatible with the West. The 1st Amendment was written in a much different context. Practicing your Islamic faith is different than shackling your women in sheets in public.
We don't roll that way. And it should not be tolerated. I mean, the f*#king Frenchies get this, man!!!!!
Didn't ban it then... why now?
Oopsie, so you want people in sheets then???
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:43pm PT
|
it's a public security risk to have people walking around in sheets.
Paranoia will destroy ya!!11
Should we ban trench coats too? I've seen so many movies where guys hide machine guns in their coats.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:44pm PT
|
Sorry, the principle is much the same - requiring that women clothe themselves (or not) in certain ways, due to social custom, largely due to religion. Especially head and face coverings.
A hijab is a gown that covers a woman's body, including regular/daily clothes, when she is outside her home. It includes a head covering, but not necessarily a face covering. The face covering is usually called a niqab - the mesh thingie.
A scarf isn't quite a hijab isn't quite a niqab. But the underlying principle is much the same - requiring that women cover all or part of themselves for religious/social reasons, sometimes dressed up as custom or even law.
I sat next to a woman from Iran on the plane home from London last week, and got an education in these things. She now lives in B.C. and is quite modern. Google seems to confirm what she said, although there are many small variants.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:46pm PT
|
I got a B+ in con law, yo. No way veils are getting banned here.
|
|
zeta
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:46pm PT
|
well put Anders...
Of course there are differences between a hijab, burqa, niqab, and chador...too often people in the west lump them all together when they think of the 'oppressed Muslim woman' and don't pay any attention to the different cultural settings veiled women are in (wearing a veil in secular Turkey or India is clearly quite different from wearing a veil in Iran, for example).
Check out this article for more insight on this:
http://fathom.lib.uchicago.edu/1/777777190136/
the main problem is that people too easily equate wearing a veil with the following:
-being 'backwards'
-oppressed
-a relic of old times (see Blue's posts above)
it's an oversimplistic generalization that people need to really think about.
I do my research along the INdia/Pak border and plenty of Muslim women I know--who consider themselves 'modern' liberated' and certainly not oppressed--get quite pissed off at the way most westerners seem to assume that their choice of wearing a veil makes them oppressed.
(in my fieldsite, they wear the hijab, which is the headscarf, with the face totally visible)
food for thought
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:48pm PT
|
I might think the "religious freedom" arguement had merrit if the men in that religion wore veils too.
|
|
Gene
Social climber
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 08:56pm PT
|
Great! Governments are legislating dress codes. How messed up is that?
I'm amazed that all you freedom of expression folks are behind this violation of human rights.
Gene
|
|
Gene
Social climber
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2010 - 09:05pm PT
|
So every traditionally dress Muslem female has C4 strapped to her tummy?
That is the thought and attitude that blows.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!