[QUOTE=carnivorousplant]
[Inigo Montoya]I don’t think you know what that word means.[/Inigo Montoya]
[/QUOTE]
It wasn’t a mistake that I chose that word. 
[QUOTE=jsgoddess]
On what planet?
[/QUOTE]
Don’t you understand? All humans have gotten along perfectly for the entire history of the planet.
Until now: We’re faced with “New World War known as the Clash of Civilizations.” (AKA “War On Terror” ™ – according to Our Beloved Wartime President.)
Selected areas of study for the historically ignorant (not you):
-
20th Century European history. (Background. Timeframe specified to narrow things down.)
-
History of Islamic contacts with Western Civilization; or Barbarian European contacts with Islamic Civilization. Whatever the description, this “clash” is NOT NEW!
This seems pretty simple to me…a person has a right to wear whatever type of clothing is proscribed by their religion. Also, a place of employment has the right to demand that certain types of clothing be worn or not be worn, according to what will allow employees to perform their jobs properly & safely. If those two things clash, then the employee has to decide if it is worth the continued employment to modify the clothing in whatever way is acceptable to the employer. If not, they leave the job.
IMO, a teacher’s face needs to be seen, and her hands need to be available to write & demonstrate. I agree with John Mace here, that covering up everything else is fine, as I don’t see any other impedments to teaching (nuns used to do it all the time…if you can believe what you see in the movies, they even played basketball on the playground! 
)
[QUOTE=Bridget Burke]
this “clash” is NOT NEW!
[/QUOTE]
Well, it’s new for our generation.
Yes, the cuban missile crisis was scary, but ever since it ended,we’ve had 40 years of rationality and peace. Londoners and New Yorkers could go to work without worrying about bombs exploding in the subway or their office towers.
Does anyone know if western women are allowed to go around in public without a veil in Saudi Arabia?
This reminds me of another incident.
[QUOTE=carnivorousplant]
Wow.
I think the school should work with her on some sort of compromise.
We’ve gotten enough Muslim folks angry as it is. It would be nice to have some on our side.
[/QUOTE]
I might be a bit more sympathetic if Western women were not forced or pressured to wear the veil in Saudi Arabia. If they want to follow all their customs in the west, they should allow westerners to follow their customs in Arab lands.
She is simply trying on the matyrdom cloth to see how it fits.
She didn’t have a problem interviewing for the post, where one of the interviewing board was a man.
If she had such great faith, she would have behaved consistantly, but no, she basicly lied her way into her job, by not being honest about her religion and her adherance to it.
She misrepresented herself, I wonder if its because she assumed that wearing a veil would not be acceptable at interview, and why the hell does she think that it acceptable post interview.
Its quite easy, if you misrepresent yourself at interview, and later get on found out, you go down the road and don’t complain about the fix you got yourself in.
The Q’ran does not specify veils, nor a Burka, this is just an interpretation by man.
The teacher ought to invest in a Mr. Microphone. The students will be able to hear her more clearly, and the adults will see her embrace of retro kitsch as endearing.
[QUOTE=casdave]
One comment I have seen from Muslim men who are asked to comment on this is that not wearing a veil means that the woman can be more readily seen by unwanted men, and this makes them more vulnerable to things such as rape.
Not all muslim men say this, but I wonder just what it says about those who do, are they trying to relate the urges they might feel ?
They somehow don’t understand that actually, most of the rest of the world copes without veils rather well, that the mere sight of a womans face does not automatically send men into a sexual frenzy that must be satisfied with rape.
I would be surprised if a rapist would be deterred by a veil.
[/QUOTE]
Please note that the onus is still on the woman-even veiled. Only veiled and shrouded and confined, can she be trusted to be out among men. The sight of her naked face will cause men to become well-I’m not sure exactly, but it IS all her fault, for not covering up the way she should have. I remember reading an article in TIME or Newsweek last year about how women are not allowed outside without a male escort in some areas of the Middle East.
People, regardless of your religious beliefs: this is fucked up.
I also concur that she must have mis-represented herself in the interview. I cannot see this as anti-Muslim or even pro-West. This is a simple employment/job requirement problem.
So in other words, eleanor, women should be free, as long as they agree with you.
[QUOTE=Ensign Edison]
So in other words, eleanor, women should be free, as long as they agree with you.
[/QUOTE]
WTF? How on earth did you get that from what eleanor said?
[QUOTE=Quartz]
I can’t cite it, but there was some research done and seeing the mouth of the person speaking is very important to understanding what they say.
[/QUOTE]
I’m just a wee bit deaf (thank you, rock and roll) and cannot read lips but I understand people a lot better if I can see their mouths.
[QUOTE=rayh]
WTF? How on earth did you get that from what eleanor said?
[/QUOTE]
What she’s saying is that because she believes women should be as free as men to make decisions about their lives, it’s stupid and wrong that some women have decided differently than she thinks they should. Her position only makes sense if every woman who chooses to veil is ignorant, or brainwashed, or otherwise not as capable as eleanor to know what’s best for them.
[QUOTE=Polerius]
Does anyone know if western women are allowed to go around in public without a veil in Saudi Arabia?
[/QUOTE]
Saudi passports and ID cards show women’s faces.
She’s treating the men in her workplace differently than she treats the women. If I were a man, I’d be offended.
Just like I’d be offended (pissed off, actually), if I worked with a man whose religious beliefs caused made him refuse to shake hands with female coworkers. I don’t know if I’d have a leg to stand on, but I’d sure be complaining.
[QUOTE=Voyager]
I might be a bit more sympathetic if Western women were not forced or pressured to wear the veil in Saudi Arabia. If they want to follow all their customs in the west, they should allow westerners to follow their customs in Arab lands.
[/QUOTE]
Who’s “they”? You seem to be homogenizing a large swathe of opinion there old chap. “Aisha Azmi” sounds like a South Asian, not an Arabic name, and therefore the practices of Saudi Arabians have pretty much nothing to do with her decision. Only inasmuch as, say, a US Methodist has any relation to a Russian Orthodox Christian.
Personally speaking, while respecting people’s rights to change their mind, and to do what they want provided they don’t interfere with others, a) I think the veil is in fact interfering with the education of the students, both directly and via the staff discomfort and hassle in the school and b) having heard her interviewed extensively on British radio the other day, I think this woman is full of shit.
[QUOTE=bluethree]
Just like I’d be offended (pissed off, actually), if I worked with a man whose religious beliefs caused made him refuse to shake hands with female coworkers.
[/QUOTE]
The local Lubavitch guy who’t touch a woman who is not his Wife. Why on earth would you have a problem with that?
[QUOTE=chappachula]
Hasidic Jews look weird and eat funny food, A
[/QUOTE]
Dude, those coats are sharp.
[QUOTE=jjimm]
Who’s “they”? You seem to be homogenizing a large swathe of opinion there old chap. “Aisha Azmi” sounds like a South Asian, not an Arabic name, and therefore the practices of Saudi Arabians have pretty much nothing to do with her decision. . . .
[/QUOTE]
The hell? Leave the talking out the ass to your betters, son. Aisha was the name of Mohammed’s third wife, and is most assuredly an Arab name.