[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Except it is rarely their choice, it is conditioning.

Originally Posted by Brillopad

But I wonder how many of those women are just doing as they are told - forced to spout the men's words because the men know they can't. Maybe such a belief is not actually helping them. There are a lot of ifs and buts - enough to cast a lot of doubt on the validity of such 'opposition'.

But at the end of the day, as far as I and many other women are concerned, it is challenging female equality in a country that has equality laws to supposedly protect women from such backward beliefs towards women and their equality and is therefore offensive to women. In comparison the 'right' to wear what you want is not equal - it's trivial.

Technically we are not allowed to wear what we want anyway - that is a misconception to direct attention away from the real issue. There are rules about decency, racial/homosexual hatred etc and various other dress codes, so why is an exception made for this particular religion when it is offensive to about 50% of the population. It makes one doubt how 'equal' women really are in this country.

Both of these posts are incredibly patronising towards Muslim women.

Brillo, Your point of view is ultimately hypocritical, you've taken your view of what the Burkha stands for and you are passing it off as fact as a way of telling women what they can and cannot wear. Feminism is about equality but also the freedom of choice, if a woman wants to wear a Burkha then that is her choice to do so, of course there are controlling husbands/boyfriends etc out there. It's quite common in abusive relationships for the abuser to tell the abused how to dress and that's something that happens in relationships regardless of creed or race. You can't use that as an excuse to dictate to other women what is acceptable or not depending on your own standards.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Both of these posts are incredibly patronising towards Muslim women.

Brillo, Your point of view is ultimately hypocritical, you've taken your view of what the Burkha stands for and you are passing it off as fact as a way of telling women what they can and cannot wear. Feminism is about equality but also the freedom of choice, if a woman wants to wear a Burkha then that is her choice to do so, of course there are controlling husbands/boyfriends etc out there. It's quite common in abusive relationships for the abuser to tell the abused how to dress and that's something that happens in relationships regardless of creed or race. You can't use that as an excuse to dictate to other women what is acceptable or not depending on your own standards.

I don't believe I am being hypocritical. It is commmon knowledge what the burkha represents - it isn't simply my opinion.

Yes it is quite common for men to abuse and control women across the board, but being afraid to challenge this unacceptable behaviour in some cultures/religous groups is also unacceptable. Religious belief is no excuse.

The wearing of such clothing is demonstrating hatred of women and a disrespect for women's rights whether coming from men or a small minority of women who have been 'encouraged', by whatever means, to believe this. Why should the obvious hatred of women be more tolerable than hatred of race or sexual orientation?

There is no difference and to act as if there is - is what is hypocritical in my book and I would hope in most peoples' books.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I don't believe I am being hypocritical. It is commmon knowledge what the burkha represents - it isn't simply my opinion.

Yes it is quite common for men to abuse and control women across the board, but being afraid to challenge this unacceptable behaviour in some cultures/religous groups is also unacceptable. Religious belief is no excuse.

The wearing of such clothing is demonstrating hatred of women and a disrespect for women's rights whether coming from men or a small minority of women who have been 'encouraged', by whatever means, to believe this. Why should the obvious hatred of women be more tolerable than hatred of race or sexual orientation?

There is no difference and to act as if there is - is what is hypocritical in my book and I would hope in most peoples' books.

People who are capable of abuse are capable of it with or without religion. Blaming religion won't fix the issue. It's not about fear, it's about knowing that blaming a religion won't do **** to actually solve the issue of abuse. Islam could disappear from the world overnight and people who would have engaged in domestic abuse would still do so because it's less about religion and more of a personality flaw that abusers all share.

Again, you are assuming your interpretation of headscarves is the only interpretation of it. There would be plenty of independent Muslim women who would defend their right to wear their religious dress because they believe differently and their beliefs can from an informed place. This is something that's been proven by the women-led protests against banning Muslim headwear in the past.

Are they all simpletons that have been led astray and are incapable of thinking for themselves? Of course they aren't, it's not very feminist to denounce an entire group of women for fighting for their rights to wear what they please.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

People who are capable of abuse are capable of it with or without religion. Blaming religion won't fix the issue. It's not about fear, it's about knowing that blaming a religion won't do **** to actually solve the issue of abuse. Islam could disappear from the world overnight and people who would have engaged in domestic abuse would still do so because it's less about religion and more of a personality flaw that abusers all share.

Again, you are assuming your interpretation of headscarves is the only interpretation of it. There would be plenty of independent Muslim women who would defend their right to wear their religious dress because they believe differently and their beliefs can from an informed place. This is something that's been proven by the women-led protests against banning Muslim headwear in the past.

Are they all simpletons that have been led astray and are incapable of thinking for themselves? Of course they aren't, it's not very feminist to denounce an entire group of women for fighting for their rights to wear what they please.

I have made it clear in previous posts that I have no issues with 'headscarves'. My issues, like many, are with full face and body coverings - niqabs and burkhas. However I don't feel that any male politician should be suggesting all Western women should wear headscarves out of solidarity for a single religion - a religion whose values many do not agree with. As a non-religious woman I don't feel any solidarity with women who choose to wear headscarves for religious reasons. Why would any non-Muslim woman want to endorse such beliefs. Personally to do so would be against my own belief that religion is simply superstition. I feel his motivations are simply based on his own PC opinions.

I know such control is about personality flaws in men - the point I am making is that religion is being used by these men to 'justify' their behaviours. We know from experience that male security guards, for instance , have been reluctant to Stop and search Muslim women wearing niqabs and burkhas because of 'relgious' implications. Muslim men know the West are fearful of causing 'offence' by doing so with the obvious security implications of that.

Security being just one issue.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have made it clear in previous posts that I have no issues with 'headscarves'. My issues, like many, are with full face and body coverings - niqabs and burkhas. However I don't feel that any male politician should be suggesting all Western women should wear headscarves out of solidarity for a single religion - a religion whose values many do not agree with. As a non-religious woman I don't feel any solidarity with women who choose to wear headscarves for religious reasons. To do so would be against my own belief that religion is simply superstition - I feel his motivations are simply based on his own PC opinions.

I know such control is about personality flaws in men - the point I am making is that religion is being used by these men to 'justify' their behaviours. We know from experience that male security guards, for instance , have been reluctant to Stop and search Muslim women wearing niqabs and burkhas because of 'relgious' implications. Muslim men know the West are fearful of causing 'offence' by doing so with the obvious security implications of that.

Security being just one issue.

The politician can suggest what he wants, he's not actually demanding anything of anyone, people are free to ignore what he has to say. As he said in the article that you neglected to post in full, he's all for freedom of expression and that includes the right to express things that you disagree with. You've just taken the snippet of what he said out of context so you have a reason to shake your fist and go 'Grrr Muslims! Grrr Political Correctness!'

Abusers will always look for excuses for their actions, blaming the excuse doesn't stop the abuse from happening.

Your point about security guards sounds very much like those 'share if you agree' posts on facebook that are often bull**** meant to rile up people looking for an excuse to be angry. If there is a security concern then any good security official will act regardless of a burkha or not, the law is on their side when it comes to anyone that might cry foul for Security guards following procedure.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

The politician can suggest what he wants, he's not actually demanding anything of anyone, people are free to ignore what he has to say. As he said in the article that you neglected to post in full, he's all for freedom of expression and that includes the right to express things that you disagree with. You've just taken the snippet of what he said out of context so you have a reason to shake your fist and go 'Grrr Muslims! Grrr Political Correctness!'

Abusers will always look for excuses for their actions, blaming the excuse doesn't stop the abuse from happening.

Your point about security guards sounds very much like those 'share if you agree' posts on facebook that are often bull**** meant to rile up people looking for an excuse to be angry. If there is a security concern then any good security official will act regardless of a burkha or not, the law is on their side when it comes to anyone that might cry foul for Security guards following procedure.

I think every woman has a reason to shake her fist at such blatant discrimination of women on British streets in 2017. The message is obvious even if some choose to ignore it.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have made it clear in previous posts that I have no issues with 'headscarves'. My issues, like many, are with full face and body coverings - niqabs and burkhas. However I don't feel that any male politician should be suggesting all Western women should wear headscarves out of solidarity for a single religion - a religion whose values many do not agree with. As a non-religious woman I don't feel any solidarity with women who choose to wear headscarves for religious reasons. Why would any non-Muslim woman want to endorse such beliefs. Personally to do so would be against my own belief that religion is simply superstition. I feel his motivations are simply based on his own PC opinions.

I know such control is about personality flaws in men - the point I am making is that religion is being used by these men to 'justify' their behaviours. We know from experience that male security guards, for instance , have been reluctant to Stop and search Muslim women wearing niqabs and burkhas because of 'relgious' implications. Muslim men know the West are fearful of causing 'offence' by doing so with the obvious security implications of that.

Security being just one issue.

This simply isn't true. If a woman in a veil tries to come into this country or any European country, she is asked to remove her veil at immigration control. If she feels uncomfortable, she can remove her veil in private or just show her face to a female immigration officer. There are no exceptions... none. She is just as likely to be searched by an immigration officer as anyone else. There are always plenty of female IO's around because even Western women often object to being searched by men.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have made it clear in previous posts that I have no issues with 'headscarves'. My issues, like many, are with full face and body coverings - niqabs and burkhas. However I don't feel that any male politician should be suggesting all Western women should wear headscarves out of solidarity for a single religion - a religion whose values many do not agree with. As a non-religious woman I don't feel any solidarity with women who choose to wear headscarves for religious reasons. Why would any non-Muslim woman want to endorse such beliefs. Personally to do so would be against my own belief that religion is simply superstition. I feel his motivations are simply based on his own PC opinions.

I know such control is about personality flaws in men - the point I am making is that religion is being used by these men to 'justify' their behaviours. We know from experience that male security guards, for instance , have been reluctant to Stop and search Muslim women wearing niqabs and burkhas because of 'relgious' implications. Muslim men know the West are fearful of causing 'offence' by doing so with the obvious security implications of that.

Security being just one issue.

This simply isn't true. If a woman in a veil tries to come into this country or any European country, she is asked to remove her veil at immigration control. If she feels uncomfortable, she can remove her veil in private or just show her face to a female immigration officer. There are no exceptions... none. She is just as likely to be searched by an immigration officer as anyone else. There are always plenty of female IO's around because even Western women often object to being searched by men.

Edited to add: the security issue with Muslim women is no different to anyone else who wants to step over the threshold into the UK.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

This simply isn't true. If a woman in a veil tries to come into this country or any European country, she is asked to remove her veil at immigration control. If she feels uncomfortable, she can remove her veil in private or just show her face to a female immigration officer. There are no exceptions... none. She is just as likely to be searched by an immigration officer as anyone else. There are always plenty of female IO's around because even Western women often object to being searched by men.

Edited to add: the security issue with Muslim women is no different to anyone else who wants to step over the threshold into the UK.

What you said is correct but I wasn't thinking so much about airports as more everyday situations such as going into banks, schools or really any public area with criminal intentions.

There have been cases of men wearing burkhas and posing as women to commit crimes. It would also make it easier for men or women to commit terrorist acts if less likely to be challenged.