# Banning head scarves **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [April 1, 2017, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525 "2017-04-01T19:03:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2017, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/21 "2017-04-01T21:32:36Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > [http://www.vabike.org/wearing-a-winter-mask-still-a-felony-in-virginia/](http://www.vabike.org/wearing-a-winter-mask-still-a-felony-in-virginia/) > > “I spoke in favor of the bill, and explained that I had been stopped and told I was in violation of the law punishable by a felony.” You said that you knew it was enforced on bikers. What you cited was hearsay by one cyclist that didn’t tell us why he was supposedly stopped and he was just “told” something. That cyclist never claimed anything was enforced. It’s nothing new for cops to say shit to see how you react if they’re suspicious of you for whatever reason. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2017, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/22 "2017-04-01T21:33:57Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > So your point was… ? That it was a bad analogy? And that therefore … what? > > This thread isn’t about topless women (notice the thread title). Why don’t you just tell us how you feel about laws banning headscarves as worn by Muslims. Maybe you can even opine about Trump’s Muslim ban, as you did elsewhere. Why not tell us what you really think? I don’t think banning hijabs should be allowed on public property. Private property - should be up to the owner. “No shirt, no shoes - no service” kind of thing, you know. Does that satisfy your inquiring mind? ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2017, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/23 "2017-04-01T21:35:03Z")
What was your point with post 10 btw? What did citing that law have to do with the portion of the post from elbows that you quoted? ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2017, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/24 "2017-04-01T21:44:22Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > What was your point with post 10 btw? What did citing that law have to do with the portion of the post from elbows that you quoted? Just pointing out that U.S. also has laws banning certain kinds of concealing wear. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2017, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/25 "2017-04-01T23:53:00Z")
First, let me point out that I was making an analogy. Not perfect, but a way of thinking about it. Yes, you can choose not to emigrate and many of the head scarf wearing women are not refugees; many were even born here and their parents weren’t refugees either. Second, I just said head scarves, not face coverings. Third, although the original proposal went down in flames, the current Liberal government keeps talking about bringing back a modified version that would still ban religious displays (except crosses) by public servants. Finally, imagine that for one reason or other, there were refugees from the US and the only place that would take them was this South America country. My point was that one person’s perceived religious obligation might appear odd to another person, but if it does no harm, why should it be banned? And I say this as an atheist who thinks all religion is pretty absurd. But mostly (although not entirely) harmless. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/26 "2017-04-02T00:02:08Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Third, although the original proposal went down in flames, the current Liberal government keeps talking about bringing back a modified version that would still ban religious displays (except crosses) by public servants. The EU is currently discussing whether laws forbidding “overtly religious displays in public places” in EU countries are allowed (several instances of teachers with scarves in Germany not being allowed to become public servants, the latest was struck down). Experts pointed out that despite the on the surface neutral wording, the only overtly religious display is the head scarf. Crosses on necklaces can be tucked inside the clothes, and there are not a lot of jewish men with kippas looking for work in that area. But the Muslims are the biggest minority, and the most hated one right now (esp. with the overlap of being visible foreign-looking, no matter how many generations they have lived here). So the argument is that a law that disadvantages a specific minority, that already faces unreasnable discrimination in daily life from right-wing lowlifes, is not neutral, and against the spirit of the Human rights convention/ EU constitituion. I hope it doesn’t get through therefore. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/27 "2017-04-02T00:57:08Z")
I’m still a firm believer that if, instead of black shawls, they all wore Hermes scarves, somehow France _would_ be cool with it! ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/28 "2017-04-02T01:12:41Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > Virginia law: > > [http://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter9/section18.2-422/](http://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter9/section18.2-422/) > > § 18.2-422. Prohibition of wearing of masks in certain places; exceptions. > It shall be unlawful for any person over 16 years of age to, with the intent to conceal his identity, wear any mask, hood or other device whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place, or upon any private property in this Commonwealth without first having obtained from the owner or tenant thereof consent to do so in writing. However, the provisions of this section shall not apply to persons (i) wearing traditional holiday costumes; (ii) engaged in professions, trades, employment or other activities and wearing protective masks which are deemed necessary for the physical safety of the wearer or other persons; (iii) engaged in any bona fide theatrical production or masquerade ball; or (iv) wearing a mask, hood or other device for bona fide medical reasons upon (a) the advice of a licensed physician or osteopath and carrying on his person an affidavit from the physician or osteopath specifying the medical necessity for wearing the device and the date on which the wearing of the device will no longer be necessary and providing a brief description of the device, or (b) the declaration of a disaster or state of emergency by the Governor in response to a public health emergency where the emergency declaration expressly waives this section, defines the mask appropriate for the emergency, and provides for the duration of the waiver. The violation of any provisions of this section is a Class 6 felony. Is this law enforced in Virginia? ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/29 "2017-04-02T01:20:50Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > I don’t think banning hijabs should be allowed on public property. Private property - should be up to the owner. Unfortunately, it confirms what I concluded from your first post (#2 in the thread). Fortunately, in my country, such bigotry based on religious intolerance is prohibited under human rights legislation. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2017, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/30 "2017-04-02T01:40:52Z")
It’s sad how some people come up with utterly ridiculous justifications for shitting on other people who are different from them. Parizeau tried that in the 1995 sovereignty referendum, and Harper tried that in the 2015 Federal election. Fortunately, Quebec and Canada did not proportionately have as many Muslim hating bigots in those votes as the USA did in it’s recent presidential election. It is truly sad watching bigotry parade about under the guise of freedom. Free to discriminate against others simply out of bigotry? That’s not freedom. That’s oppression under a false flag. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2017, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/31 "2017-04-03T07:44:14Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > In Spain and Hispanic countries, one verse from a Pauline letter about how women should be “modest in church by covering up their hair” developed into the tradition of the Mantilla [Mantilla - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantilla) - a wide shawl. (And ironically, as is often the case once a custom become tradition, a shawl originally intended for modesty quickly became an elaborate status symbol with lace and silk: expensive. The opposite of what Paul was talking about). And the notion that women must be covered from head to toe, with only their faces and the tips of the fingers showing, produced such beauties as mermaid, faralaes or chulapa dresses. Very modest! There’s no skin showing, specially if you look at pictures from, say, mid-20th century Spain or at current ones from parties in Saudi Arabia, but there is also no doubt about the exact measurements of the body inside. There is no rule about modesty that can’t be turned upside-down and inside-out. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/32 "2017-04-05T07:57:51Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > There is no rule about modesty that can’t be turned upside-down and inside-out. True. And it Shows that most “modesty” rules are about power or Tradition, because the context in Paul’s letter, and the NT as a whole, is not that women should be modestly covered because their bodies are sinful, leading men astray etc. No, women should not wear jewelry, Gold and pearls because Christians should sell all their possesions and give the Money to the poor! Strange how that aspect never Comes up when fundies (Christian or otherwise) talk about women being modestly covered… ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 9:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/33 "2017-04-05T09:08:19Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > They going to enforce this on Catholic nuns too? The Amish? Well, yes. The French proscriptions on headdress following the French Revolution were _specifically_ targeted at Catholic nuns. Dunno about the Turkish bans introduced by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in Turkey in the 1920’s. They were targeted as differentiation between religions as well as between state and religion, and womens head-coverings may not have been an issue? ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/34 "2017-04-05T10:38:17Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > I’m interested in why you’re so keen to ban something as innocuous as a headscarf. What’s your reasoning? The reasonning over here was : -From the right : we’re invaded by muslims who don’t respect our values -From the left : the headscarf is a symbol of women oppression -Everybody : voters don’t like headscarves, so we better support the ban ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/35 "2017-04-05T11:03:03Z")
> [@Melbourne](#): > > Well, yes. The French proscriptions on headdress following the French Revolution were _specifically_ targeted at Catholic nuns. > > Dunno about the Turkish bans introduced by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in Turkey in the 1920’s. They were targeted as differentiation between religions as well as between state and religion, and womens head-coverings may not have been an issue? But we were speaking of Quebec, not France during the revolution, where no, they have no intention of including Catholic nuns in this idea. Or the Amish. And noone has yet addressed what they will do should all the non Muslim women, in solidarity with their sisters, ALL take to wearing headscarves? As fashion, not religious statement. Will they throw them all in jail? How will the state decide who’s making a religious statement and who’s just expressing their fashion sense? Like the silly bathroom gender rules, it’s entirely unworkable when it actually comes to enforcement. And as so, an utter waste of everyone’s time. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/36 "2017-04-05T14:24:19Z")
> [@Melbourne](#): > > Well, yes. The French proscriptions on headdress following the French Revolution were _specifically_ targeted at Catholic nuns. During the French Revolution, there were far more Catholic nuns than Muslimas around, and Catholicsm was part of the restrictive old state that the revolutionaries wanted to get rid of in favour of a more egalitarian and secular, rational Society. That’s not comparable to today. And while there is a law that, because the modern French Republic is a secular state, and therefore all Kinds of religious Displays are banned in Schools and other govt. places, French Society isn’t as secular as that, because when politicans discusses a law for gay marriage, 50% of the Population was opposed, with lots of Demonstration in the street. > [@](#): > > Dunno about the Turkish bans introduced by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in Turkey in the 1920’s. They were targeted as differentiation between religions as well as between state and religion, and womens head-coverings may not have been an issue? From what I’ve heard, Atatürk wanted both a secular state - Kemalism is the Name for that ideology - and to drag the Turkish Population (kicking and screaming into the cenutry of the fruitbat) into modernity. Therefore, he forbade men to wear the fez - so the really religious adapted to a knit cap that reminds me of jewish kippas - and he forbade women to wear the full veil, that is, Niquab. Headscarves - at the turn of the century - were modern and European compared to the old, cultural-traditional Dress. (Today in Europe they are associated with being backwards, old-fashioned, stuck in religious Tradition - how quickly fashions and perceptions Change.) It’s also forbidden (until recently Erdogan and his Islamist AKP changed it) in Modern Turkey to wear headscarves in public buildings and Schools as sign of religious extremism. Some fundies send their Young Girls deliberatly to a western Country (not France) because there they can go to Uni in full veil if they want to. ---
**Author:** ![Weisshund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ba8739/32.png) [@Weisshund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weisshund)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/37 "2017-04-05T14:27:20Z")
Perhaps simply ban all clothing what so ever. Then it’s an even playing field for everyone. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/38 "2017-04-05T14:36:36Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > And noone has yet addressed what they will do should all the non Muslim women, in solidarity with their sisters, ALL take to wearing headscarves? As fashion, not religious statement. Will they throw them all in jail? How will the state decide who’s making a religious statement and who’s just expressing their fashion sense? Because most People learn their own cultural norms and don’t see how it’s done in other cultures, or think about it, it’s an automatic Reflex to think of one’s own Norms as “normal” and everybody else who does it differently as “weird” (or foreigner). I have a book at home with \>2 dozen ways to Twist, drape and knot scarves and kerchiefs as cool and chic accessory to clothes. Scarf draped around the neck = modern. Scarf twisted bandana-style over the hair = still cool. But headscarf tied the muslim way = terrible, are you a foreigner? There’s no logic or reason there at all. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/39 "2017-04-05T15:05:27Z")
I can understand why face coverings should be prohibited or discouraged in some situations. But headscarves? I’ve yet to hear of a good reason for banning them that wasn’t based in bigoted dickery. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2017, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525/40 "2017-04-05T15:51:17Z")
> [@Weisshund](#): > > Perhaps simply ban all clothing what so ever. > Then it’s an even playing field for everyone. Europe’s too cold for that in many Areas during the Major part of the year. And in hot Areas, you’d get sunburn = Skin cancer. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banning-head-scarves/783525.md?page=3)