fair enough. 
Are you for fucking real? ‘Muslim’ is a religion, not a nationality.
I said I thought it stupid because it cuts off communication-the face is the most expressive part of the human body. To cover it denies both the communicator and the receiver the full ability to comprehend one another.
What’s with the personal attack? I am not sure what you mean by my “good intentions”. I also am somewhat puzzled by your second statement here-which statement is that? The one about this one woman wearing a veil in the UK or the Catholic school one? Sarahfeena and I take a different view of the nun’s there-I think that making the kids sit at their desks and wait for death was cruel. IMO, the nuns could have gathered the kids into a circle or even the dreaded and much mocked group hug to gain whatever scrap of comfort could be had at that time.
My panties are none of you business, wadded or no. They are not wadded at present.
I said I had no time or patience for someone being coy behind a mask-and that is true. How this now impugnes an entire section of Muslim adherents or even women in general is beyond me.
The only reference I made to women coerced was the one about they cannot go un-escorted to the shops. Surely you can see that this would constrain and confine women. It was OT to the thread, but perhaps you didn’t realize that. The article went on to say that those women who are left without brothers, husbands or sons suffer greatly from this restriction. AFAIK, this is not part of Islam, this is cultural. Even if it were part of the religion, I would find fault with it. Self denial as a way to deeper faith is one thing; being unable to take care of yourself or your children due to harsh social mores or laws is quite another.
OK-you read alot into stuff. 1. I don’t like when women “choose” to live in a way that makes them “unequal” to men(your words, not mine). This is an opinion.
-
the fact that if they choose to do so is their option is not contradictory to #1.
-
there is no “eleanorland”–and I did not say that they had to stop–I only said I thought it was stupid. I did not say they were brainwashed-you said that. Whose posts are you conflating with mine, your own? How did you arrive at me being in charge of women’s choices half a world away?
-
I don’t know why they choose it. Perhaps we should have a thread by a woman in a burka or full face veil or similiar to explain her choices for the education of us all.
All of this ire from you towards my posts comes from your posts # 31 and 34. This is you putting words into my mouth, motives into my posts. I cannot help you.
Sorry, some how my post got cut off. Meant to have this bit as well in my reply to you. I reread everything when I got a moment this morning.
I shouldn’t have been so harsh towards the nuns, and for that I am sorry. But I find it disturbing that the kids were told (IMS-I don’t have time to reread the story) to stay at their desks. I would have wanted to do anything but sit there-as a kid or as an adult. I do think that nuns are (or should be) as open to criticism as anyone-pastors, rabbie, imams, elders etc. But that was just me being snide (the gender crack).
Thank you for the correction. I’m still (slowly) reading Reading Lolita in Tehran, and it’s got my panties in a huge wad over what may indeed be outdated politics in Iran. You’re absolutely correct that the average American (including me) is woefully ignorant of the current situation “over there” (meaning all of Iran and Irag and Saudia Arabia and Afganastan and the rest of the Middle East, as if it was one lump entitiy) and we’re even hard pressed to acknowledge that there are multiple countries with multiple governments and multiple ways of doing things.
OTOH, substitute “Saudi Arabia” or “Iran and Afganistan” in my post and the point remains. Choosing to veil = cool. Forced veiling = not cool.
eleanor, as usual, you want to make assertions and then act like you’re not asserting anything. Your mind is a mess. “What’s with the personal attacks”? Are you serious? The last time you posted you claimed you didn’t have to correct a factual error or apologize for offending people in the Pit, now you’re asking what’s with the personal attacks? Are you on some kind of medication that prevents you from thinking clearly?
The rest of your jumbled rambling is just more of the same strange nonsense. “I said I thought it stupid because it cuts off communication” – right, you think it’s stupid. “I said I had no time or patience for someone being coy behind a mask-and that is true. How this now impugnes an entire section of Muslim adherents or even women in general is beyond me” – okay, so you ‘have no patience’ for the subsection of female Muslims who wear a veil, right? I didn’t say anything about women or Muslims in general. Over and over again you make points about how stupid, wrong, dangerous, and unequal veiling is, then you turn around and go ‘How dare you suggest I just said something right then!’
Yes. I know what an opinion is. It’s something that still has to be rational, and is acceptable to challenge. Anyway, here you admit that you “don’t like” their decision. You really very badly want this to be compatable with not thinking you know what’ sbetter for them. This is because you think you’re a Nice Person. Therefore, even when you very obviously do think you know better, you feel compelled to deny it. It’s okay, you know. Sometimes we just know better than other people. The question isn’t whether that’s inherently wrong, but whether it can be justified in context.
Your position, therefore, is that things which are stupid should continue? More doublethink.
No, I said that if they’re not stupid or being coerced then they might just be choosing it of their own free will for good reasons. You’ve recently started acknowledging that you have no idea why they do it (though this did not stop you from deciding it was stupid). That’s a good step, and I encourage you to learn more, while keeping your mind open to the idea that you might be wrong about the stupidity.
As for me “putting words in your mouth”, again, you have a pattern of making assertions and then protesting when they are challenged or critically analyzed.
No one said it was. But the customs that go along with being Muslim are common place in her native country-not in England.
Would you settle down?
What the fuck is this now? Settle down? Telling someone to “settle down” in the Pit is like saying “I’m too retarded to come up with an actual flame”.
So, your position is that people whose religious practices are commonplace in their native countries but not where they currently live should abandon those practices? All the Hasidic Jews in Brooklyn previously mentioned, for example?
Arg, cut meself off. Oh wait, they don’t have “native countries” to go practice in, since most weren’t born in Israel. So do they get a pass for you, Guin?
Are you actually saying “All those crazy heathens should integrate or go back to where they belong”?
So? You can’t see the face of someone you talk to on the phone either. If its a security concern then shouldn’t the rule be “you CAN’T see me unless I can see your face” not “I would prefer if you removed your veil when seeing me”
While I don’t think a veil impedes teaching (except to the extent the kids are freaked out by someone wearing a veil), I don’t like the way this teacher had no problem going barefaced at the interview but now professes some right to wear a veil while teaching.
I know that wires are getting crossed because we are discussing two issues (teacher wearing a veil in class and mickity muck asking people not to wear veils). In this particular case, we were talking about muckity muck asking people not to wear veils. The ski mask implies criminality. If security is the issue then why just ask, why not require no veils?
If I were ruler of the world, or simply the one to write the policy for the school, I wouldn’t write a rule stating “No Muslim women may wear full veils.” I’d write “Teahers may not obscure their face while teaching.”. Covers veils, ski masks, paper bags, what have you. It’s not, for me, about religious expression, but about giving students an unobscured view of the face. If she wants to wear the veil in the teacher’s lounge, in the parking lot, in the hallways, fine! But not while teaching.
Is it possible that her students could understand her if they tried a little harder? Possibly, but I don’t think that the onus should be on them, frankly. And, as you say, since she didn’t wear it to the interviews, but NOW claims she can’t take it off, she’s played a bait and switch game which makes me more dubious of her honesty and character.
Did I say that? No, I did not. My point is, this woman needs to be aware that there are different cultures and she might need to make accomodations-rather than expect everyone around her to change, without her doing likewise. Give a little, get a little.
In this instance, her veil is obviously interferring with her being able to do her job. She seems to be refusing to compromise-so why should everyone else do so, when she won’t budge?
And the reason why I said, “calm down” was because you’re becoming hysterical. Get a fucking grip.
And you should also hear administators condescendingly dismiss students’ pleas for having educators that possess basic functional english skills and are able to communicate concepts in an intelligible manner.
*still pissed off that our class appeal for an independent reevaluation of our grades at the University of Washington was denied, when our Russian calculus professor with zero functional oral or written English skills blamed the students supposed lack of ability for their 1.1 class grade average. *
less pissed after karmic justice was served when, 5 years later, I found that same professor as my new coworker in a shitty minimum wage warehouse temp job stuffing envelopes for bulk mail advertising.
Guin, whatever the fuck you’re on about is not what I was talking about. At all. I was addressing eleanor’s general points, not about this woman. I have made no argument whatsoever about this woman, or even about veiling in general, except to say that I think a valid argument is possible either way. How about before you Miss Snootypants at people, you try to follow what’s going on?
Still too retarded to come up with a real flame, huh?
Not so much that I still consider “retarded” an intelligent insult.
OH NO! Miss Snootypants strikes again! Careful, you might cut someone with that tongue of yours, oh my!
That was a little better, though. Keep at it, and you too can one day become an acerbic jackass like me.
That’s not fair. I happen to know that Guin does some chores for an elderly gentleman that lives nearby. She shows him how to use the washing maching then goes out to prune his fruit trees. Then he hangs out his pyjamas as he watches her beaver away up the ladder.
But what about the parlimentary muckity muck that asks women to remove their veils but don’t ask jews to remove yamulkas (I am assuming he does not, for all I know he could be asking people to hide their crosses when they speak to him). It doesn’t seem to be a security concern. What is the reason behind this request?
Again, a yamulka does NOT muffle one’s voice, or hide one’s face.