Females In France Face Full Face Exposure

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Not true.

I`d imagine it`s just as illegal for a Christian to wear the Hijab in Paris as it is a Muslim.

Hijabs are banned from French schools, not all French public places. It's the burqa and niqab that have been banned everywhere.

However, I'm sure you're right: it would be unacceptable for any Christian in Paris to wear a hijab. Christians have never been associated with anything like the hijab... certainly not, say, the city's patron saint. And I'm sure that any Parisian would automatically dismiss someone dressed like this as entirely un-Christian:

 

[Willamena]

you don`t need a law to keep women clothed in Canada.
It`s too damn cold to go around without clothes.

Just so. I suspect the issue has come up before few municipalities.

I agree but that`s not my argument.

My argument is pointing out the hypocrisy of bashing this French legislation while idly accepting similar laws and even laws more confining of freedom of expression.
The fact that it is Muslims from Muslim nations who are protesting the loudest strikes me as hypocritical to an extreme considering the extremist subjugation of freedom for women in every Muslim nation I know of.

I happen to agree with the French legislation.
If they don`t like it they can go back to Saudi, Syria, or whatever theocratic hell hole they came from..godspeed!

That France has sacrificed a personal freedom in the name of avoiding "suppression" of females is unfortunate. My comment makes no statement, though, about how unfortunate it is that other countries also do that.

 

[linwood]

Hijabs are banned from French schools, not all French public places. It's the burqa and niqab that have been banned everywhere.

My mistake.

this is due to their property of keeping the face covered while a Hijab doesn`t cover the face.

Understood.
Thank you.

But it doesn`t change or negate the point of my statement.

 

[linwood]

My comment makes no statement, though, about how unfortunate it is that other countries also do that.

And that is my point.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Not Canada.

But, in any case, everyone else doing it isn't good justification for France doing it.

France needed no justification To do it. Only the ability to pass it into legislation.
France was probably the first country to establish freedom for the people, and that included the right and power to legislate.

 

[Willamena]

And that is my point.

Again, the topic is France. I have no desire to derail the thread any more than we already have.

 

[linwood]

Again, the topic is France. I have no desire to derail the thread any more than we already have.

This is no derail.

This is a perfectly acceptable question towards this OP.

France is being criticized for a law regulating personal dress.
All countries have laws regulating personal dress.

Why is France being picked out of the crowd for criticism?

 

[Willamena]

This is no derail.

This is a perfectly acceptable question towards this OP.

France is being criticized for a law regulating personal dress.
All countries have laws regulating personal dress.

Why is France being picked out of the crowd for criticism?

Why does it matter that all countries have laws regulating personal dress? As you said, it's hypocritical of someone to criticize one without critizing the other. It's not okay to critize France in this regard, but the flip-side of that is that it is okay for France to do this because everyone else can do it.

Or do you have some other point?

France is being "picked out" because they have made this law, that has appeared as this news item, at this time, which has become this topic, on this forum.

 

[linwood]

It's not okay to critize France in this regard, but the flip-side of that is that it is okay for France to do this because everyone else can do it.

I don`t recall implying such a thing.
In fact I stated that this law AND the laws similar to it in my country are perfectly acceptable to me.

I am not one who believes "Freedom" is something that is always "good".

Or do you have some other point?

I believe I`ve made my point quite clear numerous times.

France is being "picked out" because they have made this law, that has appeared as this news item, at this time, which has become this topic, on this forum.

And I ask "Why is this even a news item?" since it is not "News" in the sense that it is pertinent, unique and different.

It is news because it ****** the Muslims off and the media just looooves ****** off Muslims.
That is why it is news.

To claim this goes too far in subjugating personal freedoms is to devalue the same personal freedoms being subjugated elsewhere.

To claim this is religious intolerance is to claim the the Wiccans who can`t worship "Skyclad" in a public park are victims of religious intolerance.

I simply don`t see why this is an issue at all other than the fact that it sells papers to the ignorant and nicely highlights the hypocrisy of the average Muslim and those sympathetic to them.

 

[beenie]

It's not a matter of the right to wear a burqa; it's a matter of the right to wear what you want. It's also a matter of the right equal treatment under the law regardless of gender or religion.

But here's the thing: AFAICT, nobody was asking for the society to change. Before this law passed, it was perfectly legal for a woman to wear a burqa or a niqab. AFAIK, there had never been any French law against these garments.

Here, we have a case of society changing to exclude the newcomer, not the newcomers demanding society change to exclude them.

i agree with all of this, especially the bolded.

...and i still dislike the burqa.

I agree with your point.

I also think it's hypocritical that in the name of societal integration, the French government has put in place a huge barrier to integration.

If a woman in a burqa or a niqab can function in society, then this makes it easier to be part of that society. If she really is being oppressed by her husband, then this might let her attend college in order to get a job so she's no longer materially dependent on him. If she's not being oppressed and simply chooses to wear a burqa as a matter of personal choice, then her being allowed to participate in society will make it easier for her daughters to choose not to wear one if that's what they want.

I think that if this law does anything, it will be to turn some of the affected women into captives in their own homes, while ghettoizing the rest, cutting off them and their families from the secular society that the French government claims it wants them to integrate into.

yep, totally agree.

and i still dislike the burqa.

One of the interesting aspects of this issue is the approach of Muslim countries. A very few simply take no notice it, as far as the law is concerned. Some require women to wear hijab, sometimes including veiling the face. And some put restrictions on face veils or on hijab in general.

Several Muslim countries consider the burqa an expression of extremism that is incompatible with an educated, secular society. Egyptian authorities have tried to ban the niqab in universities, though it was overturned. Bosnia is considering a ban on the burqa. Turkey, Kosovo, Tunisia, Malaysia, and Syria all forbid the burqa in some circumstances -- usually on government property and in universities. The governments of Egypt and Bangladesh discourage face veils, and the Bengali national airline forbids female employees to wear hijab.

Considering the fact that so many Muslim countries view the wearing the burqa as an extremist and undesirable form of dress, I think it's odd to castigate the French and the Belgians for coming to the same conclusion. In fact, the French and the Belgians may just be right.

maybe, maybe not.

When the vast majority of countries allow one to wear the burqa in public, isn't it a little odd for France to single it out for special criticism? Especially considering the multitude of far more urgent human rights violations in the world?



Edit: you say that every country in the world places restrictions on what one can wear in public; how many of those countries have one set of restrictions for Muslim women and one set of restrictions for everyone else?

France hasn't been known for its...urmmmm...hospitality.

 

[Willamena]

I don`t recall implying such a thing.
In fact I stated that this law AND the laws similar to it in my country are perfectly acceptable to me.

I am not one who believes "Freedom" is something that is always "good".



I believe I`ve made my point quite clear numerous times.



And I ask "Why is this even a news item?" since it is not "News" in the sense that it is pertinent, unique and different.

It is news because it ****** the Muslims off and the media just looooves ****** off Muslims.
That is why it is news.

To claim this goes too far in subjugating personal freedoms is to devalue the same personal freedoms being subjugated elsewhere.

To claim this is religious intolerance is to claim the the Wiccans who can`t worship "Skyclad" in a public park are victims of religious intolerance.

I simply don`t see why this is an issue at all other than the fact that it sells papers to the ignorant and nicely highlights the hypocrisy of the average Muslim and those sympathetic to them.

Okay. So... it doesn't matter.

 

[linwood]

Okay. So... it doesn't matter.

It only matters if you`re willing to oppose this subjugation of freedom while hypocritically accept the subjugation of similar freedoms.

Which is what seems to be going on with the existence of this "news" story.

 

[Willamena]

It only matters if you`re willing to oppose this subjugation of freedom while hypocritically accept the subjugation of similar freedoms.

Which is what seems to be going on with the existence of this "news" story.

"The subjugation of similar freedoms" isn't the topic, though. No accepting or rejecting it is necessary in order to comment on this particular subjugation, nor is it implied in criticism of France's move.

 

[linwood]

"The subjugation of similar freedoms" isn't the topic, though.

It more than easily fits within the parameters of the OP.
It is pertinent to the topic.

No accepting or rejecting it is necessary in order to comment on this particular subjugation, nor is it implied in criticism of France's move.

Indeed, it is only implied in criticism of Frances move while at the same time ignoring similar legislation elsewhere.

That`s where the implication lies.

 

[Willamena]

Indeed, it is only implied in criticism of Frances move while at the same time ignoring similar legislation elsewhere.

That`s where the implication lies.

If you say so. I disagree (that that's happened here).

 

[Reptillian]

France's Senate backs National Assembly and bans women from wearing the burka in public

Wearing a burka in public is set to become illegal across France after senators passed a nationwide ban.

The country’s upper house voted by 246 votes to one in favour of the measure, although there were a number of abstentions.

This means that a measure banning full face Islamic veils, also including the niqab, taken by the National Assembly, the lower house, in July was ratified.

Women who defy the planned law face fines of up to £125, or being ordered to attend citizenship classes.

These sentences, which would be doubled if the ‘victim’ is a minor, are designed to avoid men subjugating women.

The measure will be become effective in the spring of 2011, subject to a six-month period of mediation, and possible appeals.

source

​

As a matter of security this appears to be a wise decision.

Makes me glad that I'm living in a country where women can dress up as a dark blue ghost every day if they want to and not have others dictate what they can and can't wear. Personally, I'd move to Antarctica before I'd let someone tell me how I have to dress.

 

[linwood]

Makes me glad that I'm living in a country where women can dress up as a dark blue ghost every day if they want to and not have others dictate what they can and can't wear. Personally, I'd move to Antarctica before I'd let someone tell me how I have to dress.

Start packing.

Take a parka.
I`m not dictating that you should take a parka I`m just suggesting it.

 

[Smoke]

Christians have never been associated with anything like the hijab... certainly not, say, the city's patron saint. And I'm sure that any Parisian would automatically dismiss someone dressed like this as entirely un-Christian:

But hijab is not banned, so how is this photo relevant to the banning of the burqa?

 

[Kathryn]

I think this law in general is ridiculous. Of course, there are situations which would, for security purposes, require that a burka or even a simple veil be removed but to mandate that a particular article of clothing be outright outlawed is such an infringement of basic rights that it's almost laughable.

France's response to Islamic extremism within it's borders is too little too late in my opinion. To even pretend that banning the burka will help matters in any form or, errrr, fashion, is pathetic. It's simply counterproductive.

 

[Rakhel]

Don't know where you live, but if it's in the USA try walking down public streets in a thong and pasties and see what happens.

Coney Island Mermaid Parade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The pictures I could show you.....