Females In France Face Full Face Exposure

[Skwim]

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.

 

[beenie]

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

this quote is the problem with the "security" argument. if they stuck to banning it for security reasons ONLY, they *might* have a valid argument.

i feel like a broken record, (and i think i may make this my sig line now):

forcing women to wear anything and banning women from wearing anything is oppression. just because it falls on the side you agree with doesn't make it right. when are men going to STOP dictating to women what to wear and not wear?

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.

Forbidden: Two Muslim women in burkas in Douai, northern France. The country's upper house has ratified the ban on women from wearing full veils in public with effect from next spring
It followed President Nicolas Sarkozy pledging to outlaw the ‘walking coffin’ which is ‘not welcome’ in France, and which he blames for causing all kinds of social tensions.
Women who defy the planned law face fines of up to £125, or being ordered to attend citizenship classes.

If a man, like a husband or a brother, is convicted of forcing a woman to wear a veil he will be fined £24,000 or jailed for a year.
These sentences, which would be doubled if the ‘victim’ is a minor, are designed to avoid men subjugating women.

Burka ban: French President Nicolas Sarkozy argues that the law is aimed at getting all Muslims to integrate fully into French society
The measure will be become effective in the spring of 2011, subject to a six-month period of mediation, and possible appeals.
Mr Sarkozy has argued that the law, which would apply to tourists arriving from countries such as Britain, is aimed at getting all Muslims to integrate fully into French society.
But many have argued that the ban will only apply to around 2000 Muslims living on out-of-town housing estates near major cities like Paris and Lyon.
They say Mr Sarkozy has only introduced it so as to stir up distrust of Islam, leaving members of France’s 5million-plus Muslim community feeling alienated and discriminated against.
Today some Muslim women were claiming they would stay at home to avoid exposing their faces.

where does it mention "security" at all?

the bolded: sounds like those women don't want to be "liberated" or "integrated into French society".

LEAVE WOMEN ALONE!

 

[Smoke]

the bolded: sounds like those women don't want to be "liberated" or "integrated into French society".

Then they have no business living in France. Seriously, they should go back to whatever third-world hellhole they came from.

As a matter of fact, I think this is a stupid law, but I can't bring myself to pretend I care about it. The right to wear a burqa seems about as important to me as the right to cut your ears off.

 

[Skwim]

where does it mention "security" at all?

It doesn't. It's my observation.

 

[gnomon]

I personally do not agree with this.

If a woman in public decides to wear a veil, burqa, niqab, etc. based on her own beliefs than so be it.

Who cares?

If it is an issue between her and her religion, husband, etc. than let her figure it out for herself.

Hell, in the U.S. if a woman is beaten by her husband and she chooses to stay with that fool than the law says so what? This is fact. I've sat in a courtroom facing a misdemeanor marijuana charge and was treated like garbage compared to a couple facing domestic abuse charges. Smoke a joint and your trash. Hit your wife and it's "Well, Goober. Are you goin' to do that again? No sir. Than your free to go.".

 

[Skwim]

I personally do not agree with this.
If a woman in public decides to wear a veil, burqa, niqab, etc. based on her own beliefs than so be it.
Who cares?

How about France?

Recently France has become the target of Islamic threats.

One example.

"Security on Eurostar trains has been stepped up following a warning by the French government of a possible al Qaeda suicide attack in Paris.
​

Heightened precautions are being taken at the French capital's Gare du Nord station, the Eurostar terminal.

The tighter measures follow a warning by French security chiefs that two Islamist cells in Paris appeared to have been reactivated and posed a severe threat to the transport system.

Algeria has also told the French government of indications that al Qaeda-linked extremists from North Africa could be preparing a bomb attack in Paris. Armed soldiers have been deployed to guard high profile public places, including the Eiffel Tower."

source
​

And because niqabs and burkas mask one's identity they easily function as disguises for those bent on committing terroristic acts. Anyone, man or woman, can easily disguise themself with a niqab or burka to evade identification, a concern to any criminal, Islamic or otherwise, in France or in Fremont Nebraska.

Were it not for the recent Islamic threats and other ongoing troubles with Muslims, such as the kidnapping of French citizens in other countries, I would see no problem with women wearing these things. But that's not the reality of the case, and unfortunate as it is for innocent Muslims, I believe the security of the state and the safety of its citizens takes precedence over any religious custom.

 

[gnomon]

First you must consider the cases of terrorist attacks carried about by individuals wearing a niqab.

Second, having witnessed first hand the way drug enforcement has been carried out in the United States, one must question how the government will execute the laws to supposedly prevent attacks, a.k.a. crime.

In the U.S., under the guise of preventing drug use, it has been determined that the existence of indoor plumbing is enough excuse for local law enforcement to enact a SWAT style raid based on as little information of criminal activity as possible. The Fourth Amendment has been destroyed among these grounds.

That the notion that women might wear a full body dress is evidence alone enough of possible terrorist activity and what that might lead to a further erosion of basic rights in the U.S. means I cannot support this concept logically in my own country nor in any other.

As existing evidence dictates it is far more clear that known terrorist attacks occurred based upon U.S. foreign policy and were conducted without any known use of religiously required female body dresses in public.

 

[beenie]

Then they have no business living in France. Seriously, they should go back to whatever third-world hellhole they came from.

that's a great solution. "send them back" is the best you could come up with? i usually enjoy your insight, but this one makes me and i don't like the burqa...at all.

As a matter of fact, I think this is a stupid law, but I can't bring myself to pretend I care about it. The right to wear a burqa seems about as important to me as the right to cut your ears off.

it is a stupid law if their only reason for it is to make people assimilate.

How about France?

Recently France has become the target of Islamic threats.

One example.

"Security on Eurostar trains has been stepped up following a warning by the French government of a possible al Qaeda suicide attack in Paris.
​

Heightened precautions are being taken at the French capital's Gare du Nord station, the Eurostar terminal.

The tighter measures follow a warning by French security chiefs that two Islamist cells in Paris appeared to have been reactivated and posed a severe threat to the transport system.

Algeria has also told the French government of indications that al Qaeda-linked extremists from North Africa could be preparing a bomb attack in Paris. Armed soldiers have been deployed to guard high profile public places, including the Eiffel Tower."

source
​

And because niqabs and burkas mask one's identity they easily function as disguises for those bent on committing terroristic acts. Anyone, man or woman, can easily disguise themself with a niqab or burka to evade identification, a concern to any criminal, Islamic or otherwise, in France or in Fremont Nebraska.

Were it not for the recent Islamic threats and other ongoing troubles with Muslims, such as the kidnapping of French citizens in other countries, I would see no problem with women wearing these things. But that's not the reality of the case, and unfortunate as it is for innocent Muslims, I believe the security of the state and the safety of its citizens takes precedence over any religious custom.

then use security as their reasoning for "banning" the burqa rather than their weak, xenophobic crap excuse they're currently using.

i'd like to see how many terrorist attacks have been committed by women wearing burqas, and i'd like to see stats on how many have been carried out by men wearing burqas. then i'd like to see stats on how many terrorist attacks have been carried out by men and women who "assimilate" with the culture they're attacking. 9/11 anyone? those men assimilated quite well, so there goes that argument.

 

[Tiapan]

It simply means the cultural assimilation rate of the french society has become over saturated and this symbolic cultural ban is a direct consequence. What follows is worse, until balance is reachieved. Did I hear the gypsies were being rounded up and transported back to eastern europe?
And if they don't want to go?.....What happens next?

Cheers

 

[Smoke]

that's a great solution. "send them back" is the best you could come up with? i usually enjoy your insight, but this one makes me and i don't like the burqa...at all.

I didn't say they should be sent back; I said they should go back. If you're hostile toward a society and don't want to be a member of it, don't.

 

[Skwim]

i'd like to see how many terrorist attacks have been committed by women wearing burqas, and i'd like to see stats on how many have been carried out by men wearing burqas. then i'd like to see stats on how many terrorist attacks have been carried out by men and women who "assimilate" with the culture they're attacking. 9/11 anyone? those men assimilated quite well, so there goes that argument.

That's the trouble, because they were wearing niqabs and burkas we'll never know. Admittedly a bit of a factious remark, it does point up the problem.

 

[DarkSun]

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

As a matter of tolerance and respect for another culture, it's an appalling decision. And as a matter of allowing people to wear whatever they want without repression, the decision isn't only appalling, it's fascist; it's vile, it's egocentric, vindictive, malicious and just plain disgusting.

 

[DarkSun]

Then they have no business living in France. Seriously, they should go back to whatever third-world hellhole they came from.

I didn't say they should be sent back; I said they should go back. If you're hostile toward a society and don't want to be a member of it, don't.

I admittedly don't read much from you on this forum, and I don't know you too well... But I think these could be the most offensive comments I've read from you in my time here...

You're not serious, are you? If you are, could you please explain why living in a certain country should dictate what you choose to wear? Sorry if that's a straw man, but honestly, that's the argument I'm hearing from you.

 

[Smoke]

I admittedly don't read much from you on this forum, and I don't know you too well... But I think these could be the most offensive comments I've read from you in my time here...

You're not serious, are you? If you are, could you please explain why living in a certain country should dictate what you choose to wear? Sorry if that's a straw man, but honestly, that's the argument I'm hearing from you.

Yes, I'm completely serious, but I wasn't commenting on the law, which is stupid, but on ssainhu's comment that such women don't want to be integrated into French society. If your values are at odds with those of a foreign society, why would you move there and flaunt your hostility to that society?

 

[bowingtoGod]

Yes, I'm completely serious, but I wasn't commenting on the law, which is stupid, but on ssainhu's comment that such women don't want to be integrated into French society. If your values are at odds with those of a foreign society, why would you move there and flaunt your hostility to that society?

what hostility? They go there to have a better life. They still want to keep their culture. It isn't like they are forcing people to convert to Islam.

 

[Panda]

As a matter of tolerance and respect for another culture, it's an appalling decision. And as a matter of allowing people to wear whatever they want without repression, the decision isn't only appalling, it's fascist; it's vile, it's egocentric, vindictive, malicious and just plain disgusting.

Oh please we have been deciding what is and what isn't acceptable to wear for hundreds of years in every country all over the world. Not saying I agree with this just pointing out that dictating what people can or can't wear is not new.

 

[Vigdisdotter]

Interestingly enough, while the "reasoning" presented for the ban is about not oppressing women, the first thing that came to mind when I saw this was the Handmaiden's Tale by Margaret Atwood. Because there, all the rules and roles (and even dress code) is in the name of a good, orderly society.

 

[blackout]

. If your values are at odds with those of a foreign society, why would you move there and flaunt your hostility to that society?

I am totally with Smoke on this.

It is not fair to enter into another society
and expect them to change FOR YOU.
If they do not stand for, represent,
embody WHAT YOU DO...
why ON EARTH would you want to live there.

Expecting them to change their ways for YOU
is ridiculous.

And where does it stop?
(from another, but similar thread on the forum)

Why would those, who see, admire, and promote naked images of human beings be offended by liberal display of them? I'm sorry to announce it to you, but that kind of art or posters have NO place in an Islamic society, from any point of view. So just because some people 'accept and 'Enjoy' THAT kind of art does Not in any way make it acceptable for other people who, themselves and their cultural, and religious values do not endorse such vile expressions of wasted art.

Aparantely we here at RF are not supposed to "display" pictures of nude art,
in public debate and discussion areas where any Muslims are present.
Not even nude art of the classic Greek and Roman variety,
because...
THAT kind of art has NO place in an Islamic society, from any point of view.

Yet, France is not an Islamic society, the US is not an Islamic society,
and neither is RF an Islamic society.
Ancient (and Modern) Nude Art clearly DOES have a place IN OUR society.

Why in gods name, don't you stay in your Islamic sociteties then?
I don't get it. really.

There is NO amount of money you could pay me
to get me to go live in an Islamic society.
And I wouldn't choose to go there either,
trying to change it,
seeking to force or fluant my disgust for and counter cultural embodiment of their society.

Why on EARTH would I want to live there?
Why on EARTH would strict Muslims even WANT to live in France?

Say what you will about me,
but France should not be expected to forfiet or compromise it's culture.
It just shouldn't.
It's an unfair expectation.

Live where the culture MATCHES you.

 

[DarkSun]

Oh please we have been deciding what is and what isn't acceptable to wear for hundreds of years in every country all over the world. Not saying I agree with this just pointing out that dictating what people can or can't wear is not new.

After having read this, I've decided that I'm going to write a letter to parliament right away. I'm going to request that all grown men be required by law to wear bikinis, and should they refuse, they be fined. If elderly and obese people refuse, they get fined twice as much. Seems fair.

(Whether something has been done for centuries doesn't necessarily make it right or sensible... )

I am totally with Smoke on this.

It is not fair to enter into another society
and expect them to change FOR YOU.
If they do not stand for, represent,
embody WHAT YOU DO...
why ON EARTH would you want to live there.

Expecting them to change their ways for YOU
is ridiculous.

And where does it stop?
(from another, but similar thread on the forum)

Except in this case they're not expecting us to change for them...
We're expecting them to change for us. :sarcastic
Double standard much?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Now France has confirmed this as law. Its implementation is no longer in doubt. especially when it achieved such a wide margin of support.

It now seem that Muslims have four direct choices.
Accept the laws.
Accept the penalties.
Leave the country.
or more likely campaign for a change in the law.

It is no more outrageous than making Christians obey Muslim laws in Muslim countries.
And they get no choices.