Well, it could stop people from immigrating who seem to think such beliefs are acceptable. It is not as if we have enough assholes of our own to deal with without importing more of them.
Again, forcibly doing anything is already illegal.
But those assholes will still exist. Just because they won’t be our assholes doesn’t mean they won’t be assholes. If we are against assholes, if we are for protecting women, surely the answer is to allow immigration, since, as you yourself have pointed out, one way of trying to curb assholishness and aid women is to allow them to see alternatives, and have the opportunity to learn about and seek those alternatives?
If the ban truly did that (and on this, I tend to agree with you), it would be a bad thing, not a good one.
Hey, I’ll join the crusade to wipe out oppression just as soon as you get the UN to agree to it. But we don’t have to tolerate it here (other than our own homegrown neanderthals), nor should we be bringing them here when there are a whole bunch of people in the world who would welcome the chance to come to the west and who aren’t mouth-breathers. If the Europeans were a little more selective on who they let in the door, they probably wouldn’t feel the need to address this issue.
Wait, why should we tolerate our home-grown neanderthals? Does their place of birth or relatives place of birth mean they get a pass? Assholes is assholes, I would have said.
Well, i’m personally a European, and in general it seems that most of us aren’t particularly feeling a need to address the issue - at least to the extent that some nations among us do.
I’m not talking about a crusade to wipe out oppression. All i’m doing is agreeing with you; we should be supporters of equal rights. We should be protecting women from oppressive systems of control. And those are things which aren’t aided by a ban on burqas, no matter how common sensical it may seem to be. The best way to persude someone that your way of thinking or living is better is by simply acting as an example; if it’s really better, then people will see it. Turning away immigrants, either directly or indirectly, because you don’t like their beliefs is entirely counterproductive. It’s like refusing entirely to debate with a person you disagree with; sure, you get to avoid listening to their ideas, but you also get no chance to persuade them. The status quo is maintained.
You know, if we were really concerned about women we would ban high heels. I understand they can really damage a woman’s feet. I suspect the whole idea of a ban on some sorts of clothing is not really (for most people) about helping women.
It is about enforcing cultural norms.
(I just returned from the mall. About half of the women were veiled. Only one unveiled woman seemed to be a Saudi (he husband was dressed in local garb). Still, my sample size (30) is too small to support conclusions one way or the other.
Well, were they wearing heels too?
Even if they are wearing heels, it’s no guarantee there’s a woman under there.
It might be Sheik Mahkmoud himself for all the passer-by knows.
One good thing about the places where hiding your face is de rigeur, is that the men-folk don’t have to worry about it being abused, because the women-folk aren’t allowed anywhere near where anything important is done.
From what I understand, Dammam is one of the places where it is legal to not have the full face covering. In places like Riyadh it is illegal to not wear it.
I don’t understand the reasoning that says “When in Rome…” so no one should wear a burqa here. From the perspective of the U.S. (I know, this is Europe, but many people here seem to hate the idea of women wearing the burqa), isn’t one of the things that marks the U.S. our freedom to express ourselves, clothing wise? Lots of people have been bothered by things ranging from miniskirts to punk apparel. But those people never stopped wearing them. You’re allowed to think what they’re wearing is ugly or stupid or sexist but I don’t see why it’s unAmerican to continue to dress in your culture’s garb. Why is it that we let people wear whatever they like but get angry when it’s from another culture?
The thread is petering out, and perhaps it ought to, but before we go, I want to address the question everyone wants to ask.
Young girls were blue jeans with heels under the gown. Older women seem to wear some sort of dress, but not full length pants.
I was paying special attention yesterday and was impressed how many of the (seemingly) younger women all had eye makeup. Their mothers did not.
It is petering out because everyone has made their argument known and no one is convincing the other at this point.
I can tell about traveling from Yemen to Dubai. It always seemed to me and the people that I traveled with that there were fewer women getting off the plane in Dubai fully covered than had gotten on the plane in Yemen. So, what?
Yemen still has people giving their daughters away for marriage as young as 8. There were still people who were fully covered who got off the plane.
The burkha is a one of the tools of oppression of women. I am not going to change my mind that banning one of the means of oppressing women wouldn’t be a good thing. At least we’d take a stand against that oppression and be seen to do so even if it accomplishes little else.
What they are expressing by covering themselves from head to foot, is that western women are no better than prostitutes, advertising their wares to all and sundry.
Nice way to make yourself welcome to the natives!
Why does a personal stance necessarily imply a demand on others?
I mean, sure, there are more than likely some women who’d feel that way. But hey, just because people make choices doesn’t mean they look down on those who choose differently. I disagree with you on this issue - but I don’t think that makes you racist, or bigoted, or any of the words usually thrown about in this sort of debate. Holding yourself to one standard doesn’t mean expecting that everyone else also holds that same standard, and chooses to disregard it.
Out of interest, where do you feel the line should be drawn? I mean, we could also ban pornography, derogatory music videos, the use of suggestive images in adverts. There are plenty of things which are tools of oppression of women. Could you give some examples of such tools which for you should be banned, and which should not be banned?
If that’s what western women are taking from it, it’s their problem.
There are plenty of women who dress modestly without the burqa–some for religious reasons, some for personal. I’m sure some of them would see a miniskirt or tight jeans as trashy or even slutty. I don’t happen to agree, but it’s their right to think what they like. By wearing long sleeves shirts and ankle length skirts, are these women saying that women who are more revealing in their dress are sluts?
I mean, if they are, that sucks that they think that, but it’s their attitude to have.
What I’m taking away from this seems to be that it’s OK to have an attitude of, “Ew, sluts” as long as you’re western. If you’re from another culture, you have to conform till we think you’re American?
Pornography’s purpose isn’t to oppress women, it might be derogatory to them, along with music videos, etc, but it isn’t designed to keep them as property. The intent of the burkha is that. A slight but important difference.
In all cases? Is intent built into an object, regardless of the choices around it?
Edit: I’d also say that oppression can included derogation, as well. And quite often does.
Dangnabit, it you have a bit of proof for that, post it. If you do not, please make it clear the idea is just your opinion.
Women in Saudi Arabia can get fined if they don’t wear the damned thing.