France is close to banning Islamic face veils for women.

So - question - Let's say an atheist woman wanted to wear face veils. Obviously, she's not doing it for religious reasons. Perhaps she was scarred in a fire and is majorly self-conscious. Perhaps she moonlights as a gypsy fortune teller. Perhaps she's just so damn beautiful she doesn't think normal humans (i.e.: the uglies) should be allowed to gaze upon her beautiful face.

Should this woman be denied the choice to dress how she wishes because some "dirt worshipers" use face veils as a form of oppression?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']So - question - Let's say an atheist woman wanted to wear face veils.[/QUOTE]

You've changed the context entirely and mooted the point.
 
There, Myke - I posted your picture. Now, answer my question - are you only against wearing of face veils if it's for religious reasons? I.e.: Do you support discrimination based on religion?
 
I'm not *against* it - I said it's oppressive. Don't put words in my mouth, and don't try lead with your questions. My answer is not touching anything to do with your biased, extrapolated, and absurd secondary question.

The socio-historic legacy of what a veil represents is not entirely lost just because the person wearing it is not religious. Nevertheless, the range of incentives, pressures, and options are certainly broader for her than for a Muslim.

I think plenty of oppressive/sexist dress standards exist independent of religion, sure. Is a face veil more oppressive than, say, high heels? More? Less? I dunno. Different for sure, but both sexist nonetheless.

So you know full well you're asking and apples:eek:ranges question.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I'm not *against* it - I said it's oppressive.[/QUOTE]

So... you're for oppression of women? You don't give a damn about the oppression of women? Or you're against the oppression of women?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']So... you're for oppression of women? You don't give a damn about the oppression of women? Or you're against the oppression of women?[/QUOTE]

Yes. That's exactly it.

*sigh*
 
[quote name='mykevermin']So ultimately, bezirk, you're making a few errors in terms of what my argument is. I said something blah blah about the sexism in "this particular faith" and you misread that to mean I think it's the most sexist religion ever and Christianity gets a pass. I was wondering how you came to that conclusion (my use of "this particular" was because I was identifying the topic of discussion in this thread, which was not Christianity) - and there it hit me.

Your wife is Muslim and one who literally wears some degree of orthodoxy. So you're probably accustomed to being hyperdefensive in a nation and a culture that creates a false analogy b/w "Muslim" and "terrorist." So because I criticize the symbolic tenets of a faith, you think I'm specifically anti-Muslim and not anti-religion. That's your misreading of my words.

I'm glad you're happy and I'm glad you're wife is happy, but that doesn't change the socio/historical/cultural aspect of repressive sexuality and gender-based differences in dress as sought by the faith. It's the very point that one is a less-perfect Muslim if they opt to not wear a hijab, or not even a jilbab, right?

I see that you seem to think I'm singling out Islam here. Well, I am, because it is the topic of conversation - not because of any specific animus that I lack for any other faith or general social norms.[/QUOTE]

Hey, these are your words, taken directly from an earlier post:

"..and don't try to frame this as an issue of being anti-Islam. Forgive me if I recognize that a particular faith is flawed and sexist and oppressive..."

I think it's fair to say that's a rather anti-Islamic statement. Doesn't bother me in the slightest, but let's be a little more honest when you try to tell us all that you aren't "anti" Islam, or as you suggest, perhaps anti-religion. I truly don't care.

My point from my second post on was that these women are choosing to dress in a manner that they think is appropriate in their religion. They are not systematically oppressed, and I would wager most of them are quite happy with their choices.

So to repeat, I truly don't care if the entire world hates Islam, hates religion, hates me. There's not defensiveness about it. I've been verbally attacked, interrogated in airports, threatened with death, but I just look at that as a few ignorant people who have lived too sheltered of lives, and an inconvenience. There's probably not a better country in the world to be Muslim in.

I'm merely saying if you think all women who choose to dress in the Islamic way are oppressed, then you're sadly mistaken, and should actually take the time to talk to a Muslim woman and ask her how she feels about it, rather than tell me they're oppressed and victims of sexism. What about that doesn't seem reasonable?

And Uncle Bob, get used to one liners as responses when people here don't have anything substantive to say. Your atheist veil question was excellent.
 
The atheist veil question is only relevant in regards to the law, not to its religious context.

Berzirk, how does Islam define the clothing rules? Are they loose themselves or does your wife just not follow them? It appears from what you posted before that she just doesn't follow them.
 
[quote name='SpazX']The atheist veil question is only relevant in regards to the law, not to its religious context.

Berzirk, how does Islam define the clothing rules? Are they loose themselves or does your wife just not follow them? It appears from what you posted before that she just doesn't follow them.[/QUOTE]

The rule is that as a woman you should wear loose fitting clothing, covering the hair and neck. She elects not to follow the hair and neck part of it (meaning she does not wear the head scarf-or more accurately, she usually doesn't wear it).

A good comparison would be drinking alcohol. Drinking alcohol is prohibited, yet some Muslims know it, and elect to drink anyway.
 
[quote name='berzirk']The rule is that as a woman you should wear loose fitting clothing, covering the hair and neck. She elects not to follow the hair and neck part of it (meaning she does not wear the head scarf-or more accurately, she usually doesn't wear it).

A good comparison would be drinking alcohol. Drinking alcohol is prohibited, yet some Muslims know it, and elect to drink anyway.[/QUOTE]

And they're both strict rules, right? That's what I'm getting at, they don't have exceptions built into them or anything.
 
maybe i should read the past 4 pages but instead i'll just ask: why is this conversation happening? even if some religion advocated stabbing yourself in the eyes who cares, people will only do it if they choose to follow that religion, which is always an option to them. so long as nobody's being forced into the religion, its practices really aren't relevant to freedom.
 
[quote name='berzirk']My point from my second post on was that these women are choosing to dress in a manner that they think is appropriate in their religion.[/QUOTE]

And my point is that religions are patriarchal, oppressive social structures, no matter how happily someone dons the religious-law-prescribed articles of clothing, adopts appropriately submissive actions/behaviors, or enters into life as a member of that particular faith realizing that there's an upper limit due to how she was biologically born.

No matter how happy - the oppressive nature of religion exists independent of you or I. It is stronger than you or I - it is even stronger when people doubt its existence.
 
[quote name='SpazX']And they're both strict rules, right? That's what I'm getting at, they don't have exceptions built into them or anything.[/QUOTE]

Yes, they're both very strict rules...but people can elect to abide by them or not. I get where you're trying to go with it, but I think you're giving too much significance to it.

It's gets back to my central theme. Choice. We all see speed limits. How many of us drive exactly 55? We know it's the law, but we tend to go a bit faster. We know the repurcussions could be getting pulled over and getting a ticket, but we make that choice. Have we been oppressed by the speed limit?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Koggit']maybe i should read the past 4 pages but instead i'll just ask: why is this conversation happening? even if some religion advocated stabbing yourself in the eyes who cares, people will only do it if they choose to follow that religion, which is always an option to them. so long as nobody's being forced into the religion, its practices really aren't relevant to freedom.[/QUOTE]

You've summarized 4 pages worth of my comments right there.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']And my point is that religions are patriarchal, oppressive social structures, no matter how happily someone dons the religious-law-prescribed articles of clothing, adopts appropriately submissive actions/behaviors, or enters into life as a member of that particular faith realizing that there's an upper limit due to how she was biologically born.

No matter how happy - the oppressive nature of religion exists independent of you or I. It is stronger than you or I - it is even stronger when people doubt its existence.[/QUOTE]

Had you just come out and said that in response one, we both could've saved ourselves a lot of typing. You've got your view on religion, I've got mine. Where I bucked is when you told me that these women are oppressed, despite having never talked to one of these people that you claim are.

It's like the people that try to fight death penalties of criminals who actually want to be put to death. You were trying to fight someone else's battle, when they weren't even at war in the first place.
 
fair enough. I think we were both persistent enough to want to just drop the not-going-anywhere dialogue, but were dumb enough to keep it going.

So, yeah. time for a coffee break.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']fair enough. I think we were both persistent enough to want to just drop the not-going-anywhere dialogue, but were dumb enough to keep it going.

So, yeah. time for a coffee break.[/QUOTE]

If you're ever out in Oregon, I'll even buy the next cup ;)
 
[quote name='berzirk']Yes, they're both very strict rules...but people can elect to abide by them or not. I get where you're trying to go with it, but I think you're giving too much significance to it.

It's gets back to my central theme. Choice. We all see speed limits. How many of us drive exactly 55? We know it's the law, but we tend to go a bit faster. We know the repurcussions could be getting pulled over and getting a ticket, but we make that choice. Have we been oppressed by the speed limit?[/QUOTE]

I don't want to drag this on any longer, but my point is that your wife choosing not to follow the rules doesn't mean the rules aren't sexist and oppressive. And her choice to not follow them exists only because there aren't any consequences where she's doing it. Otherwise her only choices would be to either drop the religion entirely or modify it and remove herself to a context where that modification is acceptable. Neither of which are particularly easy.

Likewise, people violate speed limits because there are rarely any consequences for doing so.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I don't want to drag this on any longer, but my point is that your wife choosing not to follow the rules doesn't mean the rules aren't sexist and oppressive. And her choice to not follow them exists only because there aren't any consequences where she's doing it. Otherwise her only choices would be to either drop the religion entirely or modify it and remove herself to a context where that modification is acceptable. Neither of which are particularly easy.

Likewise, people violate speed limits because there are rarely any consequences for doing so.[/QUOTE]

But that's at the very basis of religion. There are plenty of things you should or shouldn't do, but just because you don't get caught, doesn't make them right. My wife would be in violation of the rules. The consequences in a religious context is that it's a form of sin. She's has her reasons for not doing it, and it's not for me to tell her she should. I'm not the one that would have to wear a head scarf.

Then lastly, the rules may be sexist and oppressive to you, but guess what...don't be a muslim woman then and it shouldn't matter. To many, many muslim women, they aren't sexist and oppressive, they actually enjoy it (seriously, I know of quite a few that take great pride in their dress) and that's what should account for far more than my opinion or your opinion on it.
 
[quote name='berzirk']But that's at the very basis of religion. There are plenty of things you should or shouldn't do, but just because you don't get caught, doesn't make them right. My wife would be in violation of the rules. The consequences in a religious context is that it's a form of sin. She's has her reasons for not doing it, and it's not for me to tell her she should. I'm not the one that would have to wear a head scarf.[/quote]

And obviously she thinks that the consequences of her defying the rules aren't bad enough for her to not do it, hence she has more choice in the matter. If her defying that rule meant that she would be outcast from her religion, culture, or family then she wouldn't have as much of a choice.

[quote name='berzirk']Then lastly, the rules may be sexist and oppressive to you, but guess what...don't be a muslim woman then and it shouldn't matter. To many, many muslim women, they aren't sexist and oppressive, they actually enjoy it (seriously, I know of quite a few that take great pride in their dress) and that's what should account for far more than my opinion or your opinion on it.[/QUOTE]

I'm sure they do, but many women enjoy staying home, cooking meals, and not going to college or getting a job. That doesn't mean a rule requiring them to stay at home and cook meals, or barring them from going to college or getting a job isn't sexist or oppressive.

If it were simply a matter of someone doing something they enjoy then there wouldn't be rules meant to pressure them via various consequences into doing that particular thing.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I'm sure they do, but many women enjoy staying home, cooking meals, and not going to college or getting a job. That doesn't mean a rule requiring them to stay at home and cook meals, or barring them from going to college or getting a job isn't sexist or oppressive.[/QUOTE]

The answer, however, isn't to make a rule saying that they can't stay at home and make pies and babies.
 
Spaz, with her decision, I detailed why she elects not to wear the head scarf normally. Sadly, she's actually afraid that people will be prejudice against her, or worse. At this point in her life, that is a bigger worry, than the worry of opposing a part of her religion. She knows she's wrong for doing it, but it's basically between her and God. Who knows, maybe a week from now, 10 years from now, she'll make the personal choice to wear it. How, in any way, shape, or form, is that a sexist or oppressive thing?

There are plenty of times where I'd rather wear shorts and a tank top, or shirtless in the backyard while I do yardwork. My faith tells me I should cover myself up and be modest. I can choose to obey, or I can choose to disobey. If there are rules for both sexes, which are identical with the exception of the head scarf requirement...how is that sexist? You're still coming from the angle the head scarf is an inconvenience, an annoyance, something that most women don't want to do, a way of controlling women, but that opinion is based on your upbringing, religion (or lack of), and gender. The people you're trying to "liberate" are perfectly happy. You tell them you're going to make a law banning them from doing so, and now you've oppressed them.

I guess in some ways I look at this as I do with abortion. With abortion, I personally don't think it should be an option unless the woman was raped, incest, all the heinous stuff, but I'm not the one that would be pregnant for 9 months, or have to make the decision to have a pregnancy aborted, so I'm OK with letting women decide what they're comfortable with on that one, and get the hell out of their way. Instead, we've got 80% of our Congress as old white guys, who are trying to make this decision for women. Baffling.
 
[quote name='berzirk']If you're ever out in Oregon, I'll even buy the next cup ;)[/QUOTE]

Now I know the PNW is known for gourmet coffee roasters, but we'll have to stop at the Rogue Brewery/Distillery as well, ok?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Now I know the PNW is known for gourmet coffee roasters, but we'll have to stop at the Rogue Brewery/Distillery as well, ok?[/QUOTE]

Ha haa. I don't drink alcohol, but some of my co-workers are big fans.
 
[quote name='berzirk']Ha haa. I don't drink alcohol, but some of my co-workers are big fans.[/QUOTE]

They know their craft for sure.

Also, allow me to derail wholly:

An Irish man walks into a pub. The bartender asks him, "what'll you have?" The man says, "Give me three pints of Guinness please."
So the bartender brings him three pints and the man proceeds to alternately sip one, then the other, then the third until they're gone. He then orders three more.
The bartender says, "Sir, I know you like them cold. You don't have to order three at a time. I can keep an eye on it and when you get low I'll bring you a fresh cold one."
The man says, "You don't understand. I have two brothers, one in Australia and one in the States. We made a vow to each other that every Saturday night we'd still drink together. So right now, my brothers have three Guinness Stouts too, and we're drinking together.
The bartender thought that was a wonderful tradition.
Every week the man came in and ordered three beers. Then one week he came in and ordered only two. He drank them and then ordered two more.
The bartender said to him, "I know what your tradition is, and I'd just like to say that I'm sorry that one of your brothers died."
The man said, "Oh, me brothers are fine - I just quit drinking."
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='berzirk']Spaz, with her decision, I detailed why she elects not to wear the head scarf normally. Sadly, she's actually afraid that people will be prejudice against her, or worse. At this point in her life, that is a bigger worry, than the worry of opposing a part of her religion. She knows she's wrong for doing it, but it's basically between her and God. Who knows, maybe a week from now, 10 years from now, she'll make the personal choice to wear it. How, in any way, shape, or form, is that a sexist or oppressive thing?[/quote]

And the consequences she thinks she may face for wearing it are limiting her choices now. The fear of getting persecuted for wearing it keeps it from being a free choice doesn't it? Doesn't it also work the other way around?

[quote name='berzirk']There are plenty of times where I'd rather wear shorts and a tank top, or shirtless in the backyard while I do yardwork. My faith tells me I should cover myself up and be modest. I can choose to obey, or I can choose to disobey. If there are rules for both sexes, which are identical with the exception of the head scarf requirement...how is that sexist? You're still coming from the angle the head scarf is an inconvenience, an annoyance, something that most women don't want to do, a way of controlling women, but that opinion is based on your upbringing, religion (or lack of), and gender. The people you're trying to "liberate" are perfectly happy. You tell them you're going to make a law banning them from doing so, and now you've oppressed them.[/quote]

I don't support the law anyway, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm not coming from any angle that the head scarf is anything other than a head scarf, but you can't honestly tell me that in Islam the only thing that separates women from men is the head scarf attachment to a certain type of clothing and other than that they're treated perfectly equally. It's a purposeful difference and separation between men and women that has deeper meaning than simply some cloth. Otherwise, why would there even be a difference? It's not like female anatomy requires something on the head/face and male anatomy doesn't.
 
Spaz, there are consequences on both sides. Like I said, her personal feeling on why she does or doesn't do it, is really on her. I don't pry, because it's not my business. I think it's sad that she feels a consequence for merely dressing as her religion requires could bring hostility and attacks, but that's sort of the world we live in now.

There are absolutely lots of other differences between the sexes. Some favor the man, some favor the woman. A woman can't lead men in prayer, but that's in large part due to the postures that are made during prayer. As the husband, I'm required to be the financial supporter of the family. When my wife worked, everything she made, she could technically keep for herself and have me pay all the bills, based on the religion. If she inherited money, it's hers, not mine.

Matter of fact, as I think about it, in the religion, women have almost identical rights or more rights than men. Cultural practice (like in Saudi or Afghanistan) is quite different, with women unable to drive, forced cover, etc.

Oh, here's one, a man under extremely strict, some would say near-impossible criteria, can marry up to 4 women. This is largely rooted in the beginning of the faith, as many men were dying young, dying in battles, and in order to quickly build the community larger (through more kids). But in the US, this would not be allowed because in the religion there's a rule that says you shouldn't violate local laws unless it's something that would prevent you from practicing your faith. So if Oregon passes a law that I can't pray at work, I should break that and do it anyway. If they pass a law that says I can't pray in a state park, I should avoid praying in a state park.

Women can only marry 1 man. This also gets back to inheritance and lineage reasons. If a woman has two husbands, then gets pregnant, you wouldn't know whose it was.
 
Islam doesn't require the veil or burqha just like Christianity doesn't require you to wear long pants when cutting grass in 100 degree weather. Let's just be clear on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top