Should Veils be discarded ?

[michel]

I have deliberately put this in "Current Events" because, as I see it, this argument has come about from a purely practical standpoint.

I don't believe that this is racism, nor do I believe that it is out of anti - Muslim 'ism.

What do you think?



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/story/0,,-6129970,00.html

Straw: Veils should be discarded

[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]Press Association
Friday October 6, 2006 11:13 AM[/FONT]
[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]Cabinet Minister Jack Straw has waded further into the row over his call for Muslim women to remove their veils by saying he would like the garments to be discarded totally.
The former Foreign Secretary sparked controversy when he revealed that he asks female visitors to his constituency surgery to uncover their faces, to improve "community relations".
But asked on the BBC if he would rather the veils be discarded completely, Mr Straw said: "Yes. It needs to be made clear I am not talking about being prescriptive but with all the caveats, yes, I would rather."
Muslim leaders in the Commons Leader's Blackburn constituency said many Muslim women would find his comments, originally made in his local newspaper, "offensive and disturbing" and Respect MP George Galloway demanded his resignation.
But Mr Straw said the increasing trend towards covering facial features was "bound to make better, positive relations between the two communities more difficult".
He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: "You cannot force people where they live, that's a matter of choice and economics, but you can be concerned about the implications of separateness and I am."
Mr Straw wrote of his fears in a regular column for the Lancashire Telegraph.
A meeting with a veiled woman had made him consider the "apparent incongruity" between her entirely English accent and UK education and the wearing of the veil. "Above all, it was because I felt uncomfortable about talking to someone 'face to face' who I could not see," he wrote.
But Conservative policy director Oliver Letwin said it would be a "dangerous doctrine" to start telling people how to dress, while Liberal Democrat party chairman Simon Hughes dubbed the remarks "insensitive and surprising".
The Lancashire Council of Mosques said Mr Straw had "misunderstood" the issue and it was "deeply concerned" by his "very insensitive and unwise" statement. "For such a seasoned and astute politician to make such a comment that has shocked his Muslim constituents seems ill-judged and misconceived," a spokesman said.
© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2006, All Rights Reserved
[/FONT]


Poll to come.............

 

[jewscout]

i don't know enough about Straw to speak about where the motivation for making such a statement may have come from...

but i think that if a muslim woman wants to wear a veil, head scarf, Sombrero, or a full on Burqa then it's up to her and her comfort level and her beliefs.

i can say i want a toilet made of solid gold but it's just not in the cards, now is it?

 

[Djamila]

I can't speak for Britain, but in Bosnia and Herzegovina the wearing the veils tends to come in phases, generally as a response to other societal factors. Veils were more common, for example, during the war than either before or after it. Veils are less common in predominantly Muslim cities, and much more common in areas where Muslims are a minority. Veils are also more common among older women, and rural women, of all religious backgrounds.

Given the situation of the world, it doesn't surprise me that more Muslim women are choosing to wear veils.

As to whether or not they should be banned, I'd have trouble supporting that. The fact he is uncomfortable speaking to a woman who is veiled is his problem, not hers.

 

[Djamila]

This, though, irritates me. Now, these women are obviously choosing to dress this way - but my God? They're making a joke of themselves, not putting forth a fine and honorable Muslim persona.


Burka & Spaghetti

 

[Inky]

The fact he is uncomfortable speaking to a woman who is veiled is his problem, not hers.

Exactly.

 

[ayani]

i think he's using "veil" to mean niqaab, not hijab.

niqaab covers the etire face save for the eyes, whereas hijab generally covers the hair and neck.

i don't think the veil should be banned. it should be up to the individual to wear religious garb / symbols or not, and ideally folks would be respected in their decisions.

however, i do think that it's reasonable for a woman to be asked to remove the niqaab when, for example, she is sitting for a driver's licence photo or asked to i.d. herself in a place where everyone is asked to i.d. themselves, such as an airport.

 

[Djamila]

I agree, Gracie. It's simply not practical for a woman who chooses to wear naqib to expect to never have to show her face outside of the home under any circumstances. Now, meeting this politician in his office wouldn't be one of those circumstances in my opinion, but that sort of thing will have to be defined more clearly, legally.

And you're right about the scale. Hijab covers the hair and breasts, and the phrase generally includes the shirt and pants/skirt as well. Naqib covers the nose and mouse. Burka screens even the eyes.

 

[CaptainXeroid]

This line from the article sums it up for me.

it would be a "dangerous doctrine" to start telling people how to dress.

As long as clothing covers the bits and does not pose a danger to other people, I don't think the government has any business trying to dictate what people can or cannot wear.

 

[kai]

i dont think it should be banned, its up to women what they wear, the only point i have is that in britain it may be considered impolite to speak with someone with your face covered.

 

[darkpenguin]

right, this is great britain, we are not another country and it is not in our traditions to wear veils, i totlay agree with jack straw, they should conform to british cuture if they are willing to take our houses and jobs then why not? i know if i was going to live abroad that i would conform to thier culture as i see that as a sign of respect, and while were on the subject, it would be polite of them to speak in english seeing as that is the country they are in, again if i was to go to another country i would make sure to be polite enough as to learn thier language!!!

 

[Djamila]

I think that's the problem of the different dynamic among today's immigrants, dark. In the past, people immigrated largely from Europe and largely to countries that were more or less similar culturally anyway. They also moved free from prejudice in search of a better life.

Today's wave of immigrants largely blame the actions of the countries they're moving to for the situation in the countries they left. They're hoping for a better life, of course, and they do their best to support the countries they move to (paying taxes properly, volunteering in the army before they even have citizenship, etc.) but there's still a different dynamic of milking the cow that ate your fields.

 

[michel]

i think he's using "veil" to mean niqaab, not hijab.

niqaab covers the etire face save for the eyes, whereas hijab generally covers the hair and neck.

i don't think the veil should be banned. it should be up to the individual to wear religious garb / symbols or not, and ideally folks would be respected in their decisions.

however, i do think that it's reasonable for a woman to be asked to remove the niqaab when, for example, she is sitting for a driver's licence photo or asked to i.d. herself in a place where everyone is asked to i.d. themselves, such as an airport.

He is. Sorry for just using the term used in the article.

I think one glaring point that everyone is neglecting is that, as far as we know, we (in England) are potential targets for terrorism.

Now, it isn't my place to say how 'real' that threat is, but, from what I can understand, the intelligence service are keeping an ear open virtually 24/7.

Jack Straw's point was made from the point of view that the niqaab covers pretty much the whole of the face (just the eyes show). For all anyone knows, the person wearing one could be a man, who is hiding a bomb, or a weapon inside the voluminous clothing. I think it is from that point of view that Jack Straw made his comment. I don't particularly want to be 'anti' anyone, but, as you will see from the "Muhhamad's sword" thread, although Muslims expect us (in the west) to bend over backward to accomodate their 'needs' whilst we, in their Countries have our needs ignored. I regret writing that, but it is as I see it.

 

[kai]

darkpenguin i hope this isnt you posting under an alias

 

[Djamila]

Immigrants are also less naive. You won't see boat loads of people crying at the feet of the statue of liberty anymore. Immigrants have so much more information. They know poor residents of Canada and Scandinavia are more than five times as likely as a poor American to succeed in their lives and make it to the top income bracket.

People don't have these illusions anymore. You'll never hear immigrants from Eastern Europe refer to America as the land of liberty anymore, they refer to it as the land of opportunity - because that's what it offers best of all. England, it's the same thing. No one expects to go to England and be welcomed as their long-lost cousins from the Commonwealth. No one expects a royal visit to their private homes, no one expects to be accepted fully into British society - all of these myths, though, did exist during the collapse of the British empire and that wave of immigration.

So people come with a completely different set of expectations, and the negative expectations among them often become self-fulfilling prophecies.

It was only a few centuries ago that Sarajevo was one of the largest cities in the world, and moving here was like winning the lottery - people thought. Now it's one of the smallest capital cities in Europe and people are about as likely to move to Tashkent as they are to Sarajevo. The city didn't change at all, in fact it's bigger today than when it was the third largest city on earth. It's more modern, all of that... but the world has also changed, and we're no longer the best of the best.

 

[darkpenguin]

darkpenguin i hope this isnt you posting under an alias

no thats my dad, sorry lol that guy was awsome, see the 'old schoolers' had the right idea, at the end of the day if god had meant for us to emigrate and travel then he/she would have given us wings, the boat was probably the worst invention ever!

 

[michel]

no thats my dad, sorry lol that guy was awsome, see the 'old schoolers' had the right idea, at the end of the day if god had meant for us to emigrate and travel then he/she would have given us wings, the boat was probably the worst invention ever!

I recognise Alf Garnet, but I can only begin to try and imagine what he would have said in response to this, if the program was to be allowed past the censors now (which, of course, it wouldn't). Thanks for the laugh!

 

[evearael]

Anyone wearing baggy clothing or an oversized coat could be carrying a bomb... let's make those illegal, too!

Seriously, I find this sort of thing an absolutely disgusting infrigement on liberty, expression and religion. If the police have reason to suspect a woman has a bomb on her, detain her (or whatever the proceedure is) and let her be searched by a female officer (if time allows). If a girl or woman chooses, by her own free will, to wear a burqa, hijab, niqab, headscarf, whatever, then it should be permitted. I have nothing but respect for someone who chooses more modest dress to bring them closer to their faith.

 

[standing_alone]

As long as clothing covers the bits and does not pose a danger to other people, I don't think the government has any business trying to dictate what people can or cannot wear.

The fact he is uncomfortable speaking to a woman who is veiled is his problem, not hers.

I concur with these statements (along with other comments people have made). If a woman wants to wear a niqab or hijab, I think she should have every right to do so.

 

[Laila]

I don't think this book is particularly well written, however it does make a point of distinguishing between the two so it's worth a read if you're interested in finding out more.

 

[ayani]

I don't think this book is particularly well written, however it does make a point of distinguishing between the two so it's worth a read if you're interested in finding out more.

: nods : haven't read the book- i just saw the image as a good way to contrast hijab and niqaab.

the cover says "a critique of the face veil". what does the book critique, specifically?