Having your period? Then go to the back of the class and sit by yourself

[Poisonshady313]

Know better than what? To believe that the arrangement makes them feel inferior?

If they aren't made to feel inferior in their own mosques, why should they all of a sudden start to do so in the school cafeteria? Because YOU think they should?

There absolutely is preference.

First off, Muslim students get preferential treatment over other students by having this prayer service in the first place while other students (such as the Hindu students whose parents' protests started this whole fight in the press) do not.

That's not really what we're discussing.

Second, the physical arrangement of the prayer space demonstrates favour for the boys over the girls. If you wanted actual neutral segregation (if such a thing is even possible), you'd need to have some arrangement where boys and girls get equal pride of place: boys on the left and girls on the right, for instance, with neither group ahead of the other.

Since when does "being closer to the front" = better? Since when is it shameful to sit in the back? "place of pride"? Making things up won't help you make your case.

Third, excluding the menstruating girls only affects girls. Barring exceptional circumstances, boys are free to participate in every service. Girls are excluded at regular intervals. Discrimination on the basis of menstruation is a form of discrimination on the basis of gender.

Muslim standards of ritual purity are not meant to subjugate women. The fact that girls menstruate is a fact of life.

I don't know if this applies in Islam, but in Judaism, men can become "unclean" because of nocturnal emissions. Something they have no control over.

"When you are encamped against your enemies, then you shall keep yourself from every evil thing. If any man among you becomes unclean because of a nocturnal emission, then he shall go outside the camp. He shall not come inside the camp, but when evening comes, he shall bathe himself in water, and as the sun sets, he may come inside the camp." Deuteronomy 23:9–11

This refers to ritual/spiritual uncleanliness. When men or women become ritually impure/unclean, for whatever reason, they may not be permitted to enter the temple, or engage in other ritual activities that require ritual cleanliness.

You may not buy it. You may not like it. But the rules and regs aren't meant to bully or pick on women. The fact that you don't see it that way is your problem.

Except that in these cases, great pains are taken to ensure equal treatment: there have been court challenges and (IIRC) complaints to human rights tribunals in cases where the girls' sports team gets inferior treatment to the boys' sports team: poorer quality gym space or equipment, less desireable practice times, etc.

I'm talking about the fact that there's a separation at all, which is what it seemed you were talking about as well.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

...; it's about the fact that a fair and just society demands that our common laws and rules be applied equitably and evenly for all, and that a common good such as a public school not be used as a tool for unfairly and inequitably benefiting only one portion of society.

Your desire to be fair and just to Muslim kids who wish to follow their religion is indeed touching. I'll be sure to give your regards to St. Catherines ...

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If they aren't made to feel inferior in their own mosques, why should they all of a sudden start to do so in the school cafeteria? Because YOU think they should?

Are you sure that no Muslim girl feels inferior in their own mosque? Personally, I wouldn't want to bet on that.

That's not really what we're discussing.

It's a large part of the main issue here.

Since when does "being closer to the front" = better? Since when is it shameful to sit in the back? "place of pride"? Making things up won't help you make your case.

I'm not making things up. You've never heard the term "pride of place" before? pride of place: Definition from Answers.com

Tell you what: imagine that the school instituted a new practice: at staff meetings, the female teachers would now sit in the back and the male teachers would sit in the front. Do you think that this would open up the school and board to a challenge through the courts or the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal?

[/b] Muslim standards of ritual purity are not meant to subjugate women. The fact that girls menstruate is a fact of life.

I don't really care if it's meant to subjugate women or not. The relevant question here is the effect, not the intent.

I'm talking about the fact that there's a separation at all, which is what it seemed you were talking about as well.

The segregation is an issue on a few levels. IMO, fundamentally, "separate but equal" is rarely if ever equal.

And the fact that we do segregate on the basis of gender in some respects (some warranted, others probably not) doesn't mean that more segregation is a good thing.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Your desire to be fair and just to Muslim kids who wish to follow their religion is indeed touching. I'll be sure to give your regards to St. Catherines ...

I'm against that as well, as I am against our taxpayer-funded Catholic schools.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I'm against that as well, as I am against our taxpayer-funded Catholic schools.

I'm pleased to see your commitment to impose your preferences equitable and equally.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm pleased to see your commitment to impose your preferences equitable and equally.

I'm not imposing my preferences on anyone. If a parent wants their child to go to a faith-based school, they're free to send their child to any one of many private schools at their own expense.

 

[Poisonshady313]

I'm not making things up. You've never heard the term "pride of place" before? pride of place: Definition from Answers.com

I didn't mean to suggest you made up the term. I meant to suggest you made up applying it to the seating structure in a mosque.

When I go to synagogue, I sit in the back, and it doesn't bother me at all. I guess I could gripe that the vent for the air conditioner is on the women side...

Tell you what: imagine that the school instituted a new practice: at staff meetings, the female teachers would now sit in the back and the male teachers would sit in the front. Do you think that this would open up the school and board to a challenge through the courts or the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal?

Do the female teachers lose anything by being made to sit in the back? Do the male teachers gain anything by sitting up front?

A gripe about geography is being turned into a civil rights tragedy. Mountains out of molehills.

I don't really care if it's meant to subjugate women or not. The relevant question here is the effect, not the intent.

If the Muslim girls are complaining about being sent to the back, then you're right. If it's just a bunch of onlookers seeing something they don't understand and crying foul, they ought to just mind their own business.

The segregation is an issue on a few levels. IMO, fundamentally, "separate but equal" is rarely if ever equal.

And in many cases, a big deal is made where it ought not to be.

And the fact that we do segregate on the basis of gender in some respects (some warranted, others probably not) doesn't mean that more segregation is a good thing.

This isn't more segregation. This is the same segregation that occurs in their mosque. It's moved into the school specifically so that students don't have to leave school to participate in prayer. And it's only during the muslim prayer time. We don't have menstruating girls being locked out of classrooms, do we? Muslim girls never sitting in front of Muslim boys during Math class, do we?

The day that starts happening in public schools, I'll get all outraged about it. But as long as Muslim prayer meetings are being accommodated, the school shouldn't tell the students what side of the prayer area they need to be on. It would be better to do away with the accommodation altogether.

 

[Sunstone]

It seems to me no one would find it offensive that a school prohibited a chess club from seating menstruating girls apart from the other members of the club. But if that is so, then what is it about religious practices that deserve a greater degree of respect than secular practices? Is there something that justifies putting on kids gloves when dealing with religious customs?

 

[Songbird]

Do the female teachers lose anything by being made to sit in the back? Do the male teachers gain anything by sitting up front?

A gripe about geography is being turned into a civil rights tragedy. Mountains out of molehills.

As long as we're talking geography, yes, people who sit in back DO lose things. For one, just being told you're required to sit behind others for no reason is humiliating on its own - puzzling at the very least. For another there was an article a while back about students and classroom location. Those who sat in front were called on more often, were more attentive, had better grades, and obviously could see and hear the teacher better. Those in back were more prone to wandering attention. For this and other reasons my kids' school changes seating arrangements every so often. It keeps the kids' attention fresh.

I realize the discussion is mainly not about this. But yes, location in a setting affects one's perception, and being forced to sit in the back of the room implies a lower status than the front. I don't care what religion or culture or group mandates it, the implication is not of equality.

It still amazes me how much Christians, Muslims, and others speculate about possible reasons for the perceived subjugation of women in religious practices, when the evidence and message are darn clear - you're a woman and spiritually worth less than a man.

 

[Poisonshady313]

It seems to me no one would find it offensive that a school prohibited a chess club from seating menstruating girls apart from the other members of the club. But if that is so, then what is it about religious practices that deserve a greater degree of respect than secular practices? Is there something that justifies putting on kids gloves when dealing with religious customs?

It's not that at all.

There is no reason in a chess club to seat menstruating girls apart from other members of the club.

Muslim tradition has reasons for having menstruating girls apart from the rest.

You may not like it... you don't have to. Nobody's asking you to become a Muslim or participate in their prayer services.

They do what they do, and the school gives them permission to hold prayer services on school grounds. They're not hurting anybody, they're not bullying anybody, they're not humiliating anybody. They're conducting their services in the manner to which they are accustomed. If this is unacceptable, then the school shouldn't accommodate Muslim prayer at all.

 

[Poisonshady313]

As long as we're talking geography, yes, people who sit in back DO lose things. For one, just being told you're required to sit behind others for no reason is humiliating on its own - puzzling at the very least.

There is a reason, even if you don't accept or appreciate it. Muslim customs separate men and women in prayer. Why they don't do it side by side like Jews, and instead do it front to back, that's something I'm sure Muslims understand, even if I don't.

For another there was an article a while back about students and classroom location. Those who sat in front were called on more often, were more attentive, had better grades, and obviously could see and hear the teacher better. Those in back were more prone to wandering attention. For this and other reasons my kids' school changes seating arrangements every so often. It keeps the kids' attention fresh.

We're not talking about a classroom... we're talking about prayer services. Allah can hear prayers just as easily from any part of the room.

I realize the discussion is mainly not about this. But yes, location in a setting affects one's perception, and being forced to sit in the back of the room implies a lower status than the front.

According to who?

It still amazes me how much Christians, Muslims, and others speculate about possible reasons for the perceived subjugation of women in religious practices, when the evidence and message are darn clear - you're a woman and spiritually worth less than a man.

For what it's worth, in Judaism women are spiritually worth more than a man. All the rules, regs, and obligations imposed on men are so that we can catch up to the spiritual level that women enjoy by virtue of being women.

 

[Songbird]

They do what they do, and the school gives them permission to hold prayer services on school grounds. They're not hurting anybody, they're not bullying anybody, they're not humiliating anybody. They're conducting their services in the manner to which they are accustomed. If this is unacceptable, then the school shouldn't accommodate Muslim prayer at all.

I'm belaboring the point, but humor me if you don't mind. What if someone's religious tradition included slaughtering a chicken every Tuesday at noon? If a school decides to allow religious activities on its premises, should it be allowed to draw a line anywhere?

When I was in high school students started a Christian Bible study. Students of various kinds of Christianity participated, and some wanted a speaking in tongues and music worship time. The Bible study was in the morning before school started, in an empty classroom with just students.

One day a parent walked by with her daughter and saw some people on the floor praying and moaning and rocking. For whatever reason it disturbed her, and in a series of conversations, the school decided the Bible study could be held, but not with music or "disruptive" prayer.

 

[Songbird]

There is a reason, even if you don't accept or appreciate it. Muslim customs separate men and women in prayer. Why they don't do it side by side like Jews, and instead do it front to back, that's something I'm sure Muslims understand, even if I don't.

We're not talking about a classroom... we're talking about prayer services. Allah can hear prayers just as easily from any part of the room.

According to who?

For what it's worth, in Judaism women are spiritually worth more than a man. All the rules, regs, and obligations imposed on men are so that we can catch up to the spiritual level that women enjoy by virtue of being women.

Yeah, I am projecting my non-Muslim view onto a situation here. And I know we're talking about classrooms, but I was specifically answering your question about location in other contexts.

I didn't know that about Judaism spirituality. Interesting.

 

[HiddenDjinn]

birdie,
I can confirm what shady was saying. Women are considered spiritually superior to men, necessitating men to do more to get the same status in the world to come as women.

 

[Songbird]

birdie,
I can confirm what shady was saying. Women are considered spiritually superior to men, necessitating men to do more to get the same status in the world to come as women.

That's really interesting. I'd heard of some religions with that view, but I didn't know Judaism was one. Thanks, Yosi.

 

[Poisonshady313]

I'm belaboring the point, but humor me if you don't mind. What if someone's religious tradition included slaughtering a chicken every Tuesday at noon? If a school decides to allow religious activities on its premises, should it be allowed to draw a line anywhere?

I should hope such a person would attend a private school. Failing that, I don't think they should permit such activities. I honestly don't agree with them permitting Muslim prayer services.

But if the school did allow slaughtering a chicken every tuesday at noon, and the religion prescribes a manner in which this ought to be done, the school has no business determining that one manner is more cruel than another.... they lost that fight the moment they permitted the activity in the first place. An activity they still can very well stop permitting altogether.

When I was in high school students started a Christian Bible study. Students of various kinds of Christianity participated, and some wanted a speaking in tongues and music worship time. The Bible study was in the morning before school started, in an empty classroom with just students.

One day a parent walked by with her daughter and saw some people on the floor praying and moaning and rocking. For whatever reason it disturbed her, and in a series of conversations, the school decided the Bible study could be held, but not with music or "disruptive" prayer.

If the time was set aside for study, and not for prayer, the people who wanted music worship time were wrong. Perhaps those folks should have asked for yet another empty classroom dedicated for their purpose.

 

[Father Heathen]

Certainly not if you have anything to say about it ...

Don't get me wrong, I think they should be able to practice their primitive savagery if they want, just not in a public school funded by tax payers. If they wish to indoctrinate their children with garbage the government shouldn't have a hand in it.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Don't get me wrong, I think they should be able to practice their primitive savagery if they want, just not in a public school funded by tax payers. If they wish to indoctrinate their children with garbage the government shouldn't have a hand in it.

The government isn't having a hand in it.

They've already been indoctrinated... all they wish is for the time and space to do what they would otherwise be doing elsewhere.

 

[Father Heathen]

The government isn't having a hand in it.

They've already been indoctrinated... all they wish is for the time and space to do what they would otherwise be doing elsewhere.

The government does have a hand in it by providing that time and space, thus facilitating their disgusting practice. Sure, they're already indoctrinated, but tax money shouldn't be used to further that indoctrination. And it's fine that they would otherwise be doing it elsewhere; that's what they need to do, as it's improper for the environment of a public school. If they find their practice necessary then they should find a private school to accommodate them, not the government or the tax payer.

 

[Poisonshady313]

The government does have a hand in it by providing that time and space, thus facilitating their disgusting practice. Sure, they're already indoctrinated, but tax money shouldn't be used to further that indoctrination. And it's fine that they would otherwise be doing it elsewhere; that's what they need to do, as it's improper for the environment of a public school. If they find their practice necessary then they should find a private school to accommodate them, not the government or the tax payer.

It's not being furthered. They're not being taught anything. They're praying. Something they've already been taught.

And while I mostly agree with you about doing it elsewhere, the reason it was permitted in the school was so that they didn't have to excuse themselves from school in order to get their praying done.