Denmark's Niqab Ban vs. Amnesty International

[Rival]

Can, too. Skyi..skii..skka..dammit.

Shiing, damnit, shiing.

 

[exchemist]

Denmark's parliament recently voted to ban the wearing of burkas and niqabs in public - hooray! Denmark is the sixth European country to pass such a measure. Amnesty International thinks this is a bad idea.

Denmark: Face veil ban a discriminatory violation of women’s rights

I think Amnesty International's stance on Islam is incoherent.

Actually I think I support banning these veils and burqas.

In fact they are not required by islam at all. They are a piece of traditional Middle Eastern culture, bound up with an antiquated view of women as the sexual property of their menfolk. Hiding the faces of women in public isolates them from society and inhibits their freedom. It's a tough call to prohibit a cultural practice in a free society but I tend to think it is justifiable, given that European society should not tolerate women being held in subjugation to men.

One of our Labour MPs, Jack Straw, had a consituency with a large muslim immigrant population. He used to require women constituents visiting him in his MP's office to remove veils and burqas, saying he would not hold a conversation with someone if he could not see their face. I think that is fair enough.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Denmark's parliament recently voted to ban the wearing of burkas and niqabs in public - hooray! Denmark is the sixth European country to pass such a measure. Amnesty International thinks this is a bad idea.

Because Amnesty International is generally in favour of personal freedom. Why aren’t you?

Denmark: Face veil ban a discriminatory violation of women’s rights

I think Amnesty International's stance on Islam is incoherent.

How so?

 

[Revoltingest]

First off, when an immigrant wears a face mask, the clear message is that they are choosing to not integrate.
Second, most of these mask wearers are Muslims, and Islam is known to be a misogynistic ideology, the probability of coercion is quite high.

It would be useful to quantify the extent to which women are coerced into wearing it.
Have anything?

Third, wearing a mask is in conflict with the culture of the host country. Immigrants are not entitled to immigrate, they have been given a gift, which they should respect.

If some other country wants to enforce a standard dress & culture,
it's not for me to say they cannot. Although I'd prefer that the
impositions be minimal....unlike what's done in Islamic theocracies.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Actually I think I support banning these veils and burqas.

In fact they are not required by islam at all. They are a piece of traditional Middle Eastern culture, bound up with an antiquated view of women as the sexual property of their menfolk.

So if Islam changes or varies from place to place, those changes and variations aren’t “true” Islam? Who appointed you the judge of Muslim orthodoxy?

And even if they are “cultural” practices, so what? Is it okay to limit freedom to do “cultural” things?

Hiding the faces of women in public isolates them from society and inhibits their freedom. It's a tough call to prohibit a cultural practice in a free society but I tend to think it is justifiable, given that European society should not tolerate women being held in subjugation to men.

Telling women how to dress - e.g. with these bans - is an example of women being held in subjugation to men.

 

[Altfish]

One of our Labour MPs, Jack Straw, had a consituency with a large muslim immigrant population. He used to require women constituents visiting him in his MP's office to remove veils and burqas, saying he would not hold a conversation with someone if he could not see their face. I think that is fair enough.

Maybe, but it could deter people with genuine grievances attending his sessions.

 

[exchemist]

So if Islam changes or varies from place to place, those changes and variations aren’t “true” Islam? Who appointed you the judge of Muslim orthodoxy?

And even if they are “cultural” practices, so what? Is it okay to limit freedom to do “cultural” things?


Telling women how to dress - e.g. with these bans - is an example of women being held in subjugation to men.

It is not men making these rules, especially in a country like Denmark in which women are notably well represented in public life.

Also, it is not that islam varies from place to place, it is that islam does not contain directions for women to wear a veil. I have this on fairly good authority from various sources, including from a book by a UK muslim who was once a fundamentalist and a big believe in all this stuff, but got out of it after someone got killed. *

I do recognise it is a difficult thing, but I do believe governments are entitled to require a degree of integration from immigrants who have been given permission to settle in a country with a different culture. Nothing prevents integration quite like physically cutting yourself off, even as you walk down the street.

* Later edit: This article is interesting: French ban on face covering - Wikipedia
You will see in this the opinions of a number of different islamic authorities, from different places, confirming that the full face covering is not a requirement of islam.

 

[icehorse]

So you think the host country gets to call the shots of who may enter and how they must act?

Well host countries absolutely get to call the shots on who immigrates. As for how they must act, let's draw a distinction between "compelling action" and "restricting action", that's a crucial distinction.

 

[exchemist]

Maybe, but it could deter people with genuine grievances attending his sessions.

That would be their choice, then.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Second, most of these mask wearers are Muslims, and Islam is known to be a misogynistic ideology, the probability of coercion is quite high.

Let’s examine this a bit more closely:

You think that the way to address a group of women who are so coerced and oppressed that they can’t leave the house without their faces covered is to create a situation where they won’t be able to go out of the house at all, thereby cutting them off from education, employment, getting a driver’s license, and any sort of social support that involves leaving the house that a domesticated abuse woman might need.

Do I understand you properly? If so: do you care about these women at all?

 

[David T]

Do we? You don't think Muslim men go skiing?

And motorcycling don't forget my favorite past time. We know this dude is a Muslim because he is riding a harley. It's a total religious group.

 

[icehorse]

Because Amnesty International is generally in favour of personal freedom. Why aren’t you?

It's really hard to treat this question with a straight face, but I will try:

Societies have all sorts of rules that restrict personal freedoms. They're called "laws". Immigration is not a right, it's a gift. It is entirely appropriate for host countries to defend their cultures and to have immigrants respect their cultures.

Why are you so opposed to Western culture?

 

[Revoltingest]

We already regulate dress, in many ways.

First off, when an immigrant wears a face mask, the clear message is that they are choosing to not integrate.
Second, most of these mask wearers are Muslims, and Islam is known to be a misogynistic ideology, the probability of coercion is quite high.
Third, wearing a mask is in conflict with the culture of the host country. Immigrants are not entitled to immigrate, they have been given a gift, which they should respect.

Some regulation imposes less of a burden then other types.
But this is a judgement call, largely a function of the standards
of the majority. I don't say that Denmark is wrong...but I question
the value of this move.

 

[icehorse]

It would be useful to quantify the extent to which women are coerced into wearing it.
Have anything?

Around the world, Muslim women are consistently less safe than non-Muslim women:

[GALLERY=media, 7647]Secure-v7 by icehorse posted Aug 27, 2016 at 9:14 AM[/GALLERY]

 

[icehorse]

Telling women how to dress - e.g. with these bans - is an example of women being held in subjugation to men.

You are conflating compulsion with restriction. They are not the same thing.

 

[Estro Felino]

It's really hard to treat this question with a straight face, but I will try:

Societies have all sorts of rules that restrict personal freedoms. They're called "laws". Immigration is not a right, it's a gift. It is entirely appropriate for host countries to defend their cultures and to have immigrants respect their cultures.

Why are you so opposed to Western culture?

With all due respect, icehorse...but this kind of bans have nothing to do with culture or religion...

It's because burqas are perfect disguises for fugitives....

 

[icehorse]

Let’s examine this a bit more closely:

You think that the way to address a group of women who are so coerced and oppressed that they can’t leave the house without their faces covered is to create a situation where they won’t be able to go out of the house at all, thereby cutting them off from education, employment, getting a driver’s license, and any sort of social support that involves leaving the house that a domesticated abuse woman might need.

Do I understand you properly? If so: do you care about these women at all?

I think I'm understanding you to be agreeing that Islamic culture is such that an Islamic woman might not be allowed to be in public without a mask, is that one of your claims? Then are you saying that the way to care for these women is to allow the misogyny to persist in the privacy of their homes? Do I understand you so far?

 

[Altfish]

That would be their choice, then.

Not if the man (or men) in her family are insisting that she wear a burqa at all times.

This ban also plays directly into the Muslim extremists hands. 'The West hates us' narrative is reinforced with the ban - 'look what they are making our women wear'

 

[Revoltingest]

Around the world, Muslim women are consistently less safe than non-Muslim women:

[GALLERY=media, 7647]Secure-v7 by icehorse posted Aug 27, 2016 at 9:14 AM[/GALLERY]

This doesn't address coercion to be veiled in Denmark though.

 

[icehorse]

This doesn't address coercion to be veiled in Denmark though.

While it's not absolute proof, it does seem like a common sense set of dots to connect:

The origins of women wearing masks in Islamic cultures has to do with men owning women -->
Misogyny is rampant in Islamic cultures -->
Some Muslim immigrants insist on bringing the misogynistic wearing of masks with them -->

It seems very likely that often this means misogyny and coercion behind closed doors.