| magicalfreddiemercury 26.01.2010 08:12 |
By a large majority, the Swiss voted to ban construction of Islamic minarets because some see them “as a sign of encroaching Islamism”. Meanwhile, French lawmakers have agreed to ban the burqa in hospitals, schools and other public places (though not on the streets). Sarkozy said, “The problem of the burqa is not a religious problem. This is an issue of a woman's freedom and dignity. This is not a religious symbol. It is a sign of subservience; it is a sign of lowering.” (the French have banned the burqa in schools too, but have also banned other religious symbols in schools - like the Jewish skull cap and large Christian crucifixes. So it's not just symbols of Islam being subdued.) An opponent of the burqa ban said that the ban itself is what subjugated women by ordering them to wear something other than the burqa. So… I wonder what the opinions are here. Do you agree with the Swiss and the French? Or do you feel these laws/ideas cross the line by inhibiting religious and personal freedoms? Would you vote for these restrictions in your country and if so, what do you think the backlash would be… if any? |
| pittrek 26.01.2010 09:13 |
No. Everybody should be allowed to wear anything s/he wants, including religious symbols, or e.g. Hakenkreuz or Che Guevara pictures, I don't care. Also when christians are allowed to have churches, why can't muslims have minarets if they live there ? Seriously, I'm a bloody anarchist in some aspects |
| PauloPanucci 26.01.2010 11:01 |
pittrek wrote: No. Everybody should be allowed to wear anything s/he wants, including religious symbols, or e.g. Hakenkreuz or Che Guevara pictures, I don't care. Also when christians are allowed to have churches, why can't muslims have minarets if they live there ? Seriously, I'm a bloody anarchist in some aspects agree with you! i think everybody can wear anything, INCLUDING religious symbols. wear religious symbols is not a crime |
| Yara 26.01.2010 11:09 |
Nice topic. : ))) Thanks. |
| Serry... 26.01.2010 11:17 |
Yes I do. |
| catqueen 26.01.2010 14:25 |
I never know what to think about this... i think everyone should be free, and people should be able to practice their religion as long as it doesn't hurt people. But i also see the side of the argument that says that it is impinging on womens freedom, as some, esp children, may not want to wear it. But is that a reason to ban religious expression? The issue is the violation of women, so maybe it would be better to have more safeguards against domestic violation and subection of women, as that is the real issue, not whether they wear something or not. I veer back and forth in what i think about this. And i really dont understand the problem with minuets, although i vaguely remember hearing that the issue was someting to do with that they symbolise something, im not quite sure what. I dont know, i find it hard to understand... we are supposed to be becoming more accepting, more open, less discriminatory, and then this??? |
| catqueen 26.01.2010 14:26 |
Did i just say minuet? rofl You know what i mean! |
| magicalfreddiemercury 26.01.2010 15:01 |
catqueen wrote: ...And i really dont understand the problem with minuets, although i vaguely remember hearing that the issue was someting to do with that they symbolise something, im not quite sure what . According to an AP news article... the sponsors of the ban said "Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan compared mosques to Islam's military barracks and called the minarets 'our bayonets.' Erdogan made the comment in citing an Islamic poem many years before he became prime minister." So, they consider the minarets a threat, warning, instigation or insinuation of Islam into Swiss society, and therefore object. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 26.01.2010 15:01 |
catqueen wrote: Did i just say minuet? rofl You know what i mean! lol! |
| The Real Wizard 26.01.2010 17:34 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote: Or do you feel these laws/ideas cross the line by inhibiting religious and personal freedoms? Absolutely not. Wearing a burqa is not a religious issue, nor is it an issue of personal freedom - unless you're talking about the personal freedom of men. A burqa is nothing more than a medieval chastity belt imposed on women by men. How many of these women get a say in the situation, and how many of them enjoy being in pure black on a 90 degree summer day? In Canada, they proposed a bill to require all women to reveal their faces when voting, just so the folks in charge could be sure of the person's identity... but unfortunately it was thrown out. France is right on the money with their stance, and I hope this mentality spreads. These are not our cultural values, and never will be. If these people don't like it, then they should stay in their home countries and practice it there. If we western folk visit certain countries, we are required by law to dress according to their customs. Why should we be any different when they come here? The 21st century west should have no place for these outdated, misogynistic practices. |
| Mr.Jingles 26.01.2010 19:28 |
Sir GH wrote:magicalfreddiemercury wrote: Or do you feel these laws/ideas cross the line by inhibiting religious and personal freedoms?Absolutely not. Wearing a burqa is not a religious issue, nor is it an issue of personal freedom - unless you're talking about the personal freedom of men. A burqa is nothing more than a medieval chastity belt imposed on women by men. How many of these women get a say in the situation, and how many of them enjoy being in pure black on a 90 degree summer day? True, but it's still pretty much a personal choice. If a Muslim woman in the Western world wanted to truly break free from the traditional rules of Islam, they can pretty much do so, and file a restraining order against the men who are forcing them to wear a burqa. How many of them are willing to do this? Well, it all goes back to the issue of personal choice. So any woman who wants to wear a burqa should have the freedom to do so, unless it interferes with the work of public authorities or puts personal & public safety in danger. |
| YourValentine 26.01.2010 20:23 |
I believe that the vote on the minarets and discussions about scarf and burqua are substitute discussions because the Western countries are too scared to address the real issue: how do we want to live with a strong and growing Muslim minority in our countries. Our culture requires tolerance against all religions but we do not see much tolerance in Muslim majority countries and in the Muslim communities in our own countries. We do not hear much criticism from Muslims when people are killed or threatened because they wrote some unwanted books, filmed an anti-Islam film or drew some Mohammad comics. Instead we hear a lot of applause. We feel that our freedom of speech is being threatened by the Muslim minority and for fear of being politically incorrect we do not dare to defend it. It has not been so long ago that we freed ourselves from the rule of Christian churches and now we do not want to see other churches oppressing people in our countries ("we" is the agnostic part of the population). I do not see why Muslims should not have minarets and mosques but I do not want Turkish Imams (there are virtually no German Imams in my country!) in my country who are controlled by the Turkish government. I do not want a parallel society in my country who does not respect the constitution and the principle values of my country. It's obvious that not all Muslims are fundamentalist and Islamists and we must be fair and open.minded but we also must have the courage to address the integration issue. I do not care if someone calls me a racist because I think it's middle-age when our daughters have female teachers who wear a scarf or even a burqua. Women have fought for centuries to have equal rights and I would not want that challenged by any church. Teachers in non-religious public schools should not wear scarf or burqua, that can be required by law imo. On the other hand I think a law that tells women they cannot wear a burqua in public is absurd. How is such a law supposed to be enforced and what is the legal basis of such a law? It's hard to believe that the public feels so offended that the right of the Muslim woman to wear whatever she wears can be "outvoted". |
| magicalfreddiemercury 26.01.2010 20:45 |
YourValentine wrote: On the other hand I think a law that tells women they cannot wear a burqua in public is absurd. How is such a law supposed to be enforced and what is the legal basis of such a law? It's hard to believe that the public feels so offended that the right of the Muslim woman to wear whatever she wears can be "outvoted". What I find interesting is the argument from some that by hoping to stop what's seen as extremism by forbidding girls to wear the burqa, many girls have felt forced to leave public school to enroll in new, private Muslim schools. |
| YourValentine 26.01.2010 21:21 |
Actually, I think their parents decided that the students should go to private schools. There are not so many private Muslim schools because they are under state supervision like any other school. In Germany students can wear the scarf - I do not think there are many students wearing a burqua. There are other problems: Muslim fathers do not want their daughters to take part in the swimming lessons, many fathers try to avoid to send their daughters to school at all. Over the years German judges have started to enforce the law on Muslim families. While the girls can wear whole-body swimsuits they must take part in the swimming lessons like all other students. Religion is not accepted as a reason to stay away. It's very hard for the girls to live between the cultures when their families are totally unwilling to adopt the lifestyle of the country into which they emigrated. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 27.01.2010 04:58 |
the easy way would be to ban every single religous symbol of every single faith,problem solved then. never happen though,unfortunately. |
| pittrek 27.01.2010 05:48 |
YourValentine wrote: I believe that the vote on the minarets and discussions about scarf and burqua are substitute discussions because the Western countries are too scared to address the real issue: how do we want to live with a strong and growing Muslim minority in our countries. Our culture requires tolerance against all religions but we do not see much tolerance in Muslim majority countries and in the Muslim communities in our own countries. We do not hear much criticism from Muslims when people are killed or threatened because they wrote some unwanted books, filmed an anti-Islam film or drew some Mohammad comics. Instead we hear a lot of applause. We feel that our freedom of speech is being threatened by the Muslim minority and for fear of being politically incorrect we do not dare to defend it. It has not been so long ago that we freed ourselves from the rule of Christian churches and now we do not want to see other churches oppressing people in our countries ("we" is the agnostic part of the population). I do not see why Muslims should not have minarets and mosques but I do not want Turkish Imams (there are virtually no German Imams in my country!) in my country who are controlled by the Turkish government. I do not want a parallel society in my country who does not respect the constitution and the principle values of my country. It's obvious that not all Muslims are fundamentalist and Islamists and we must be fair and open.minded but we also must have the courage to address the integration issue. I do not care if someone calls me a racist because I think it's middle-age when our daughters have female teachers who wear a scarf or even a burqua. Women have fought for centuries to have equal rights and I would not want that challenged by any church. Teachers in non-religious public schools should not wear scarf or burqua, that can be required by law imo. On the other hand I think a law that tells women they cannot wear a burqua in public is absurd. How is such a law supposed to be enforced and what is the legal basis of such a law? It's hard to believe that the public feels so offended that the right of the Muslim woman to wear whatever she wears can be "outvoted". It's definitely not racism (we are all the same race), more like xenophobia, and it's absolutely logical. "Logical" doesn't mean "correct", of course :-) You are right, European (and other) politicians are trying to solve the effects instead of the causes. Millions of people worldwide are afraid of Muslims, and most of them have actually never seen a living Muslim :-) It's also the fault of modern media, where after 9/11 Muslims were shown only negatively, as terrorists and fanatics, but statistically terrorists are an insignificant part of the Muslim community, something similar as christian terrorists or maybe atheist terrorists ... I was born in a town with a medical school visited also by muslim students, so I'm used to meet Muslims since I've been a child and never head a problem with them. The main problems with (mostly) muslim immigrants in other countries is that they are not fully integrated into the majority, simply because the majority doesn't want them. A proper integration is the only possible solution. OR to prohibit ALL migrations, but that would lead us back to 18. century. You wrote about cases like Muhammad caricatures, or anti-Islam movies and the violent acts by some Muslims, but you don't write about Christian priests who burned Harry Potter books because they are encouraging to practice black magic. Sorry if I'm too chaotic but what I tried to say is 1) All fanatics are dangerous, no matter which God do they believe in. 2) Nobody should care about somebody's religion (or atheism), sexual orientation, cultural habits, fashion ... 3) All we should care about are LAWS. EVERYBODY who wants to live in country X should obey the laws of country X. If something is fully legal in country Y, and illegal in country X, nobody can do it in country X 4) A teacher with a burqa belongs to a religious school, NOT TO A PUBLIC SCHOOL. I hope at least 50% of the gibberish I wrote is understandable to native speakers :-) |
| FriedChicken 27.01.2010 05:53 |
I don't have a problem with civilians wearing religious symbols. Since they aren't bothering anyone with it. Also, if christians can have their churches, jews can have their synagoges. Give the muslims their mosques. I do have a problem with religion in schools. Fortunatly we don't have that problem in The Netherlands, but it's a problem in a lot of other countries (USA, UK etc) |
| pittrek 27.01.2010 05:58 |
Sir GH wrote:magicalfreddiemercury wrote: Or do you feel these laws/ideas cross the line by inhibiting religious and personal freedoms?Absolutely not. Wearing a burqa is not a religious issue, nor is it an issue of personal freedom - unless you're talking about the personal freedom of men. A burqa is nothing more than a medieval chastity belt imposed on women by men. How many of these women get a say in the situation, and how many of them enjoy being in pure black on a 90 degree summer day? In Canada, they proposed a bill to require all women to reveal their faces when voting, just so the folks in charge could be sure of the person's identity... but unfortunately it was thrown out. France is right on the money with their stance, and I hope this mentality spreads. These are not our cultural values, and never will be. If these people don't like it, then they should stay in their home countries and practice it there. If we western folk visit certain countries, we are required by law to dress according to their customs. Why should we be any different when they come here? The 21st century west should have no place for these outdated, misogynistic practices. It depends on which country are you talking about. The situation differs from country to country. There are countries where a woman can be beaten up for "dressing like a hooker" and there are countries where women can walk on streets almost naked and nobody cares :-) |
| YourValentine 27.01.2010 07:17 |
Your comments make perfect sense to me, pittrek. It really depends on the situation. In Germany Turkish people moved into the country in the 1970s when cheap labour was needed - low qualified workers who did the jobs Germans did not want. Before Turkish workers were hired we had Italian and Portuguese "guest workers". The Italian and Portuguese workers either returned to their homelands or became German citizens integratiing into the society with no problems. The Turks, however, stayed and never integrated all the same. This issue was ignored for decades by the German government - Germany not being an immigration country at ll, when in fact it already was! In the first place it was the fault of the German society not to care about this minority in the country and just hoping there won't be an integration issue. But now we have 3rd generation Turkish people who still do not speak any German. While a minority is well integrated like probably your medical students (and nobody cares if they are Muslim, Kurds or Christians) , the majority has established a parallel society refusing to teach their kids proper German and unwilling to become a part within the society rather than outside. 30% of Turkish origin young people are school drop outs, 25 % of all Turkish origin people live on social welfare and are unemployed. Most of these people are Muslims and their religioius leaders are sent to the country by the Turkish government which has not proven to have much respect for democracy or other religions and people (see the persecution of the Kurds in Turkey). Of course most Muslims just want to live in peace and raise their kids in a safe environment but how can we know the intentions of people who are not even willing to learn the language of the country they have been living in for 3 generations. We are certainly just as xenophobic as any other nation but the collective German guilt complex kicks in immediately when Turkish people complain that they are discriminated because German teachers do not learn the Turkish language to provide for better school results for their kids. After three generations it is up to the immigrants to make an effort to succeed in this society and not the other way round imo. And I have not even touched issues like forced marriages, "honour murders", import of non-German speaking wives (because the women who were raised in Germany are not submissive enough for many Turkish men), Islamistic cells and sleepers which are rare and far between but still very serious problems. |
| pittrek 27.01.2010 08:01 |
... But now we have 3rd generation Turkish people who still do not speak any German ... Exactly THAT is the problem, and that's what the governments should care about. Education, employment, integration . It's sad that instead of it they are solving the effects and not causes. But that's how politicians are :-) |
| Holly2003 27.01.2010 08:32 |
Wow, a sensble s#discussion on Queenzone. Who woulda thunked it? ;) Reminds me of a question Alan Bloom asked in his book, the Closing of the American Mind: If you were a British administrator in colonial India, would you permit the burning of a wife at the funeral of her husband? Do you impose your Western standards on the indiginous population, or do you respect their culture? Even though I disagree with most of Bloom's conclusions, I've never been able to adequately answer that particular question. |
| YourValentine 27.01.2010 08:43 |
Well, a British administrator in colonial India did not respect the right of Indians to govern themselves in the first place, so the question how to handle such traditions is really secondary. The truth is that some people in Germany (and other countries like The Netherlands, for example) already feel like living in a state of occupation by another culture. There must be a rational and applicable plan to resolve the intergration issues or else right wing nuts will profit from the situation. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 27.01.2010 09:21 |
pittrek wrote:... But now we have 3rd generation Turkish people who still do not speak any German ...Exactly THAT is the problem, and that's what the governments should care about. Education, employment, integration. I think what everyone is saying is valid - and Joxer, I understood your post entirely. ;-) - but the first thing I thought when I read the above post- not that it's wrong - is the "Christmas day terrorist" here in the states was neither poor, unemployed or uneducated. Neither, as we know, is Bin Laden. Though I agree education and integration are vital, they are not a guarantee and they're not - or shouldn't be - one-sided. Here in the states, we have a variety of ethnic communities. 'Homeland' language, foods, fashions, religions and customs are as varied as you can imagine. It's exciting and fascinating to walk into an Indian neighborhood, for example, to shop or dine. I've never felt unwelcomed or fearful of the cultural differences from one community to the other (that's not to say there haven't been some major problems). However, there is one group of people, one culture, here that holds an obvious contempt for others. The majority of these people refuse to speak English, they've pooled their resources as a community and have purchased beautiful neighborhood homes, only to tear them down and build 'churches' that they use nearly 24/7 for... who knows what. Many of them have become real estate agents and have exclusive showings - meaning they have refused to show homes to anyone not from their community. There are now three families living within doors of my own home and though they've been here for several years now, they refuse to look at me or other neighbors not of their culture. There have been town-hall meetings, outcries in the local paper, letters to our councilman and more, asking laws to be enforced that forbid business to put up signs solely in a language other than English. This community resisted for years and only recently have they begun to update their signs. It's only now that we know what these stores are since not only were the signs in their language (Korean) but the store windows were blackened, covered by shades or otherwise blocked so no one could see in from the street. At this point, despite the English signs now on the stores, no one outside their community will shop in them anyway. They have successfully made long-time residents feel unwelcome in their own town. These people are not terrorists, they are not extremists, but they are exclusionists. I mention all this is because I wonder if they dressed in the equivalent of a burqa and it was outlawed, would it change who they were as a people? Would it make them more accepting of the culture into which they moved? How do you change an attitude? A report I read recently said Muslims in the US have, mostly, been accepted, and have thriving communities like many other ethnic communities in this country. That helps to keep tensions on both sides from escalating. However, that's not to say there aren't terrorist cells here, that home-grown terrorists don't exist or that unacceptable parts of the Muslim culture is not practiced here... for example, just recently, a Muslim father ran down his daughter and her friend because they'd become too Westernized. The friend survived, but the daughter died from the injuries he caused. Just before that, another Muslim father, a cab driver, was supposed to drive his two teenage daughters to school. The older one had wanted to attend a high school dance and the family had just argued about the impropriety of that. Fearing an inability to 'save' his daughters from a life of sin, he didn't drive them to school, but parked in a remote spot, then shot and killed both of them. These men showed no sign of behaving this way. Their non-Muslim neighbors were stunned because the men had become an integral part of the community. So, while on some level, I agree with the banning of overtly religious symbols and such, I can't help wonder how such bans will actually encourage integration or prevent extremism. |
| Yara 27.01.2010 10:40 |
I guess it's fair to say that, on the specific question concerning the clothing, people should have their own way, unless the garment is likely to cause trouble in crucial public facilities, such as public schools. On the other hand, if my daughter judged her teacher on the basis of how she dresses, well, I'd think it's my daughter's fault. But that takes a little bit of explanation. Let's go. Why should I assume that girls who go into suicidal sick diets, become depressed and torture themselves because they think they can't wear bikinis or miniskirts are enjoying more freedom than the Muslim woman who choses to wear a burqha? We should take care when talking about "our culture" too. If "our culture" produced Robespierre, who went on killing hundreds of thousands in the name of "reason" and secularism; if "our culture" produced Napoleon or Stalin, I think it's fair to say that we should accord other people's cultures more tolerance. Let's not get that deep. Something more superficial: the problem is that people don't actually know Muslims. They know stereotypes. The finest proof I have that this is a false, fabricated debate is that I'm Jewish myself, very religious, and I'm friends with many Muslims: clothing is not an issue at all between us. Many Israeli Jews are friends with Muslims. When they do clash, it's not because the way each other dresses: it's because one country has its troops in the other guys' garden. And that can be annoying. I can't pretend there are no Western troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Now, these are reasons for conflict - clashes over resources and wealth. Yeah, that causes a whole lot of conflict, and there's always going to be some populistic freak who's going to use whatever the ideology or religion to his advantage and enlist the miserable, destitute or outright fanatics for his cause. We talk about Turkey. But the suicide bombers who exploded Western trains and buildings were not from Turkey. Not that I expect intelligence from public debates. I gave up on it some time ago. I think humanity is doomed. It failed. The best States can do is trying to avoid doing harm by: a) Withdrawing troops from invaded countries and stop engaging in violence; b) Stop trying to regulate every single aspect of people's lives, thus creating more frustration and resentment throughout the nations - or the banning of certain kinds of clothings would help us live better with our betheren? Of course not - it'd only generate more division, more intolerance, more violence. ---------------------------- So, as far the clothing goes, I reaaally think that people should have it their way, unless the law, in exceptional occasions, requires them not to when it comes to some public facilities. --------------------------- If one thinks mosques are being used as a terrorist haven, well, get a court order, by legal means, and do the search. If that doesn't work, get your secret agents there and produce your intelligence: But, really, if your intelligence ends up...messing things up, so to speak, and a country gets invaded, well, please, don't blame it on Muslims who didn't have anything to do with it. ------------------------- Thanks for your attention, I may bid you farewell now. ------------------------ [taking the dishes and the cups and going out to the kitchen to exert my female liberation by myself] ; -)))) [gently closing the door] PS1: And to thinkt that Europeans got mad because Native Americans went about naked... PS2: An aphorism you can quote at will, provided you give me the due credits. I put the quotations mark for you, I'm kind. : ) It's annoying to reach for two keys just to produce a single symbol...lol: "We in the West came to think that it is some way progressive to show our butts. Personally, I think progressive is being able to decide whether to chose it or not; and if so, when and where." And NO COUNTRY has got to PS2 level yet. ; ))) |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 27.01.2010 11:31 |
perhaps Joanna Lumley can lend the Burkas her support again ;-p |
| The Real Wizard 27.01.2010 12:14 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote: What I find interesting is the argument from some that by hoping to stop what's seen as extremism by forbidding girls to wear the burqa, many girls have felt forced to leave public school to enroll in new, private Muslim schools.Great! As long as our tax dollars don't pay for it, it's one less issue for the public school system to deal with. YourValentine wrote: Turkish people complain that they are discriminated because German teachers do not learn the Turkish language to provide for better school results for their kids. After three generations it is up to the immigrants to make an effort to succeed in this society and not the other way round imo. Fully agreed. Here in Canada we have hundreds of thousands of Italian people (mostly seniors now) who can't speak a word of English. To me they will never be Canadians if they cannot integrate themselves into our culture. My grandparents came here after WWII without a dime in their pocket and learned the language, worked hard for 35 years, and paid their taxes. And now their tax dollars are paying for new immigrants to sit at home and do nothing, making more money on refugee status than the average worker makes, and sending their kids to school wearing a burqa, demanding that their kid shouldn't be "forced" to participate in gym class because it infringes on their "religious rights" not to take the burqa off. To me it is appalling that people can come here now and demand that we change our ways for them, and have a social worker waiting for them to show the way to the to the social assistance office. How can these people live with themselves knowing that a country let them in and they dare to disrespect that country's established customs? If they like their ways so much, then why did they leave their country in the first place? They should go back home if things are so good there. |
| Yara 27.01.2010 13:34 |
But according to Canadian laws, which still don't abide by Hitler's standards, and Canada is as diverse as a country can be in terms of ethnic composition, thanks goodness, they are fully entitled to citizenship even if they didn't learn to speak English properly - immigrants helped build your country. They did very hard work many people didn't want to or just couldn't. If the Italian in question has worked for years in your country and has been granted citizenship, he's as a citizen as yourself: and, by the way, social workers do have to deal with fluent English-speaking Canadians as well...who get into...drugs and other sorts of problems. But when unemployment strikes back...then there's xenophobia. Now, this argument is not substantially different from what people argued in XIX Century France and Russia or, for that matter, in mid-20th Century Germany: "If Jews cannot fully integrate [because Jews used to uphold their cultural values and build close communities wherever they went], we have to do *something* about them". It was known as the "Jewish Question". This *something* throughout the years has been guetoization, expulsion, deportation, confinement, forced labor and, finally, genocide. What I tried to show - and I do think that a culture which produced two mass murders (Napoleon and Robespierre, just to name these two) in the name of reason, is not in a position, JUST LIKE SARKOZY DID, and that's the debate, to teach people what "freedom" is - is that in the name of "reason" and of our allegedly superior values, it seems we just can't stop bashing other people and behaving in an outright racist way towards them. Just think a minute: "Our values" allow for a HUGE porn industry. Yet, we are talking about keeping a woman from using whatever the hell she wants... Our values allow for stupid unfair wars in the Middle East - the FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTER WENT TO THE POINT OF SAYING THAT A CROOK WAS OK...BECAUSE IT WAS...THE WEST'S CROOK IN THE MIDDLE EAST. And that passed as political realism... And, now, they are complaining that a Muslim woman wants to wear a veil? Oh, come on. ------------- I never thought I'd come out to defend...Muslims!!! But, guess what, I fully agree with people who say they should wear whatever they want. "Our" own girls wear what they want? Or do they succumb to fashion? Or do they get sick, in fact, and depressed because they want so hard to match the standards advanced by fashion and other industries? ------- I'm by far the best student in my class. I know more Maths than my teacher this semester. I HAVE ALREADY BEEN INVITED TO STUDY IN CANADA. Now, let's say I decided to stay there: I use weird clothes, for sure. Have you ever seen how hasidic Jewish women dress? So try to know how it looks like. My accent is horrible. But whatever the person, be she/he Canandian or Chinese, WILL LEARN MATHS AS LONG AS I'M ENTITLED TO TEACH. That I can guarantee! I wouldn't accept any idiot telling me what I should or should not wear if I'm entering a class room to TEACH MATHS - SOMETHING I CAN DO BETTER THAN MOST PEOPLE MY AGE, CANADIANS OR AMERICANS OR WHATEVER. It's a matter of statistics. I'd be worse off only in South Korea, I guess. lol But then it's unfair...hehe. And that's how prejudice starts as well. If an ethnic group, and that has been happening to Jews for centuries, suceeds where other people fail, racism starts to strike hard: "The Jewish Lobby", "The Elders of Zion", or whatever the hell it is that people use to express their frustration towards the economic or political state of things. ---------- And you know what's the problem? I'LL TELL YOU ALL WHAT'S THE PROBLEM. [preparing myself to tell everyone what's the problem] THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT'S STILL SO HARD FOR US TO LIVE WITH THE DIFFERENCE, as tolerant as we think we may be. And we come up with an arsenal of rationals to justify this difficulty. That goes both ways - Muslim towards Christians and Atheists; Atheists towards Muslims; Jews towards Muslims and vice-versa... We get fricking scared of whatever happens to be too "alien" or "different" from us. And then we start thinking in terms of "us" and "them". That's never good! --------- WE DO THINGS IN THE NAME OF INTELLIGENCE AND REASON, BUT OUR INTELLIGENCE SERVICES HAVE PRODUCED A MASS SLAUGHTERING IN IRAQ... And now we curse the Muslims for wearing whatever it is they want to wear. ----------- People have to learn to respect themselves and to respect others. If they think burqha is ok for them, fine; if they think naked is better, fine! Do it. ---------- But males will still be forced to used suits in 40 degrees summers...hehehehe. : -)))))))))))))))))) |
| john bodega 27.01.2010 13:56 |
I don't think we should ever ban religious symbols. I think all religions should be absolutely free (don't even leave an option for donations) and that church and state should be 100% independent of each other. That won't solve the world's problems, but I bet it'd nip a few in the bud. |
| The Real Wizard 27.01.2010 14:36 |
Yara wrote: But according to Canadian laws, which still don't abide by Hitler's standards, and Canada is as diverse as a country can be in terms of ethnic composition, thanks goodness, they are fully entitled to citizenship even if they didn't learn to speak English properly - immigrants helped build your country.Yes, immigrants like my grandparents... not like these Italian people who cannot speak with someone who isn't Italian. There's a difference between not being able to speak the language 'properly' and not being able to speak it 'at all'. Naturally I'm not suggesting that one should drop their native language from their lives and speak only English. If the Italian in question has worked for years in your country and has been granted citizenship, he's as a citizen as yourself.On paper, yes. But in spirit, no. If my country's official languages are English and French and you can speak neither after being here for 10 years, to me you are not an equal citizen. I would never dare move to Germany and have the arrogance not to learn German. I am their guest on their soil, and it would be up to me to show them the utmost respect for welcoming me into their country. Just think a minute: "Our values" allow for a HUGE porn industry. Yet, we are talking about keeping a woman from using whatever the hell she wants...What a silly comparison. Nobody is forcing anyone to watch porn. We're talking about people from other countries forcing their values on our establishes values, i.e. equality of women. By not prohibiting this activity, we are encouraging it, and thereby stepping backwards 100 years when women were seen as second-class citizens. Until they are filming porn movies on the street in the middle of the day, these are two completely separate issues. I fully agree with people who say they should wear whatever they want.Even when they're voting, so you can't see who the voter is? How about their driver's license picture? On second thought, these women can't even see the road if their faces are covered. Would their husbands let them work even if employers would hire someone who wouldn't reveal their face? "Our" own girls wear what they want? Or do they succumb to fashion? Or do they get sick, in fact, and depressed because they want so hard to match the standards advanced by fashion and other industries?Surely there is a happy medium between "succumbing to fashion" and dressing in pure black from head to toe, face fully covered. THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT'S STILL SO HARD FOR US TO LIVE WITH THE DIFFERENCE, as tolerant as we think we may be. We get fricking scared of whatever happens to be too "alien" or "different" from us. And then we start thinking in terms of "us" and "them". That's never good!Right on the money... but it doesn't apply to this situation. We cannot put up blinders and be tolerant of any and every point of view. They are the ones creating "us" and "them" by wearing black from head to toe in a non-Muslim nation where women are to be treated with equality. Don't demonize anyone for simply pointing it out. But males will still be forced to used suits in 40 degrees summers...hehehehe. Haha, that I'd agree with. It'd be a very small step, but it'd at least make women equal to men, which is what this is ultimately about. In the 21st century, we should not be tolerant of any practice that teaches our children that women are to be treated differently than men, full stop. If we need laws to ensure women appear to be equal to men in public, then I am all for it. |
| Yara 27.01.2010 16:15 |
You missed the point. We’re talking about something the state should not get involved in – it’s the person’s body and her right to peacefully dispose of it. Dressing is a very intimate issue, and is part of the way we express our identity – it may come across as weird, but it’s not wrong, for a woman to want to dress like this. There are people who may be repugnant to our eyes: they tattoo all their bodies, have piercings put from head to toe, dress in black and go to cemeteries at night. One could argue that such a person is a risk to society – “He’s so on the fringe, I’m afraid he’s going to pick up a gun and start shooting people”. Just like people did, by the way, when they accused Marlin Manson of having inspired the crimes in Columbine… ----------------------------- The point is: it’s a deep, complete and absurd misunderstanding of Islamic culture to think that these women dress like this just because they’re forced to; that all of them are eager to use jeans, or shorts, or miniskirts: no, they’re not. Many, or most of them, to be precise, want to keep being able to dress the way they want, period – not because someone is threatening her, but because she wants to, it’s her way of expressing her cultural identity and differentiating herself from the masses. The same happens to me. I may not be all covered from head to toe, but I’m almost there: no one ever forced me to dress like this. The way I dress doesn’t affect the way I think, and my first responsibility is doing what I’m supposed to do the best way I can, without allowing my religion to step in. You know what? MOST MUSLIM WOMEN ARE LIKE THIS!!! They work hard, they don’t let their religion disturb their job, they pick up jobs in call-centers or hospitals, and most of them are great employees. IT’S NOT LIKE THAT BECAUSE I WANT TO. IT’S SO BECAUSE…THAT’S THE REALITY! There are even studies about this. And the major point is: the Western powers have been holding military bases in their countries for decades. Countries have been invaded out of thin air, without a shred of evidence: MOST MUSLIMS TOLERATE THIS. YES. The percentage of Muslims who opt for terrorism is very small. IF THEY CAN TOLERATE TROOPS BASHING THEIR PEOPLE ON THE GROUND, WHY ON EARTH, FOR A SIMPLE REASON OF RECIPROCITY, CAN’T WE ALLOW THEM THEIR RIGHT TO PEACEFULLY DECIDE ABOUT THEIR BODIES BY WEARING WHATEVER THEY WANT TO WEAR? --------------------------------- I will repeat: the Holocaust, the Terror, all that happened back on our side – AND IT DIDN’T HAPPEN IN THE MIDDLE AGES. So it’s quite funny to see someone saying, just like above, and I don’t remember who it was because I’m not pointing fingers, but only discussing arguments: “I don’t want my daughters back into the Middle Ages”. In fact, for a good deal of time, Muslims, Jews and Christians lived IN PEACE in Muslim Spain during the Middle Ages!!! In our own enlightened era, though, something like the Holocaust happened, less than a century ago. About languages: ----------------- Don’t be so quick to pass such judgments. There are a lot of people who have a whole lot of problem to understand a foreign language: it’s a major issue for schools, governments and the like. Especially people already in their mid-30’s or 40’s – it’s hard, very hard for them to learn a foreign language, to the point of getting them absolutely frustrated and sad. Now, if the job this person does requires only a modicum of English, and if this person is able to do it, why erect such barriers? YES, THERE ARE people who, out of a state of confusion or even arrogance, refuse to learn the language of the country she’s in. But guess what? - If the person doesn’t know the language, it’s likely she’s not going to get a job. If she fails to get a job, she faces the risk of being deported back home – and that happens EVERY SINGLE DAY. So most of the people you’re talking about have already being punished in one way or another. WE’RE TALKING HERE ABOUT THE LEGAL IMMIGRANTS; ABOUT THE WORKERS; ABOUT REFUGEES, for Christ (lol) sake, of wars the Western countries created! Why can’t we allow them to wear what they want? The minority of Muslims are violent or terrorists. Many Muslim women, Shia and Suni alike, dress themselves more rigidly when they’re in the outside, but they do use more informal clothing when they’re at home – it’s not like they’re dangerous fanatics! They feel they have to preserve their bodies when they’re out – I’m not the one who’s going to judge them because of this – but they feel free to dress in more liberal ways when they’re at home or at a party. ----------------------- In order to punish those few crackpots, WE MAY END UP PUNISHING THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE, WHO ARE PEACEFUL AND JUST WANT TO LIVE THEIR LIVES IN PEACE; PEOPLE WHO ARE LEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND WORK HARD, no matter what their customs. I’m not demonizing anyone. I didn’t mention names. I don’t discuss people. NEVER. I discuss arguments. And I really think that we should take care not to think that our values are, in some way, much better than other people’s or that all Muslims are against us. That’s not so…but, yes, well, many of them are reacting bitterly after so many years of racism, intolerance and misrepresentation of their lives and culture. Those who resort to violence must be punished. The peaceful majority should be left alone – unless we want to create more barriers, more resentment… When the German secret service grabbed “Curveball”, do you think he wanted to, I don’t know, be enrolled in a course on Islamic theology? No!!! He wanted money to drink, go out with whores and drive Mercedes. In short: the guy wasn’t even a Muslim, just like Saddam, who was a monster, for sure, but came from a secular movement and was opposed by many peaceful, religious Muslims. He was as religious as Richard Dawkins is. --------- I insist on the “porn point”. Most of Muslim women are not forced to dress like this any more than a person is induced by whatever it is to do or consume porn. And this industry, especially the "cheap" one, is gruesome... ------------ And, yes, there are sex slaves in Europe; there is sex exploitation; and guess what? The people behind this are often ordinary Europeans, not Muslims... Women should have the same RIGHTS as men, no doubt; BUT IN NO WAY THEY SHOULD BE FORCED TO BE LIKE MAN. No. Men and women are not equal in a whole number of aspects, and nor should they be. For a man, it is ok to go out without his t-shirt… If a woman goes out showing her breasts, well…she gets the “reputation” of being a whore. Do I think women should be allowed to go about naked? No! Women are different than men – yes, so obvious…our bodies, the way we experience some things… ------------- I wouldn’t like the State to have the power to reduce us all to jeans, shorts and miniskirts. I may not want that. I may want to use long, colorful skirts. I may not want to show my shoulders. Why the hell should the state interfere with that? When it comes to complying with the law, women have to yield in the occasions you mentioned. That’s not the issue, again. The woman doesn’t want to show her face when she’s going to get her drive license or go through an airport? Well, fine: the police will have her do it. Once she has been checked, as everyone else is, then she’s allowed to proceed. Simple as that. I don’t see why the exception should make the rule. -------- The terrorists did not come form Turkey. Turkey was, in fact, a Western ally and is a touristic spot to Israelis up until today. -------- That'd be it. Thanks again for the ovation. [gently closing the door] |
| The Real Wizard 27.01.2010 17:45 |
Yara wrote: You missed the point. We’re talking about something the state should not get involved in – it’s the person’s body and her right to peacefully dispose of it.It's illegal to be naked in public, unless you're on a nude beach. So the state already is involved. Especially people already in their mid-30’s or 40’s – it’s hard, very hard for them to learn a foreign language, to the point of getting them absolutely frustrated and sad.Fair enough. So why do they come here if things are perfectly fine in Italy where they can interact with virtually everyone? Why go out of your way to move to another country to limit your connection to your new culture? In fact, for a good deal of time, Muslims, Jews and Christians lived IN PEACE in Muslim Spain during the Middle Ages!!! ...which was a time when women were second-class citizens, and it wasn't unusual to see a woman's face covered. Not anymore. I fully understand that it's about expressing one's cultural identity. But there is a major difference between covering one's hair and covering one's face, which effectively obscures one's identity - the very opposite of expressing one's identity. She is telling the world that her identity is a number, which is kind of a paradox. On last night's news, a Muslim woman said she would stay home for the rest of her life if a law banning the burqa in public was passed. She said how she would be imprisoned without her burqa, without the slightest sense of irony of the fact that staying in one's home for the next several decades is an imprisonment in itself. Along with most rational people, I have no issue with Muslims as a whole. Their issue is clearly with us if they are immigrating here from Muslim countries and effectively telling the majority that it is wrong that we believe everyone should show their faces in public. They have no business changing the way our country works, nor do we have any business changing the way their country works. And if we have to establish laws to maintain our country's values, then so be it. I guess we agree to disagree. Cheers. |
| YourValentine 28.01.2010 03:58 |
A very interesting discussion spreading far beyond the original issues. Yara, it was me who said that she would not want to have her daughter being taught by a woman dressed in a burqua. I am not surprised to get Hitler and the Holocaust thrown back to me, that is normal in such discussions and I am not offended. Here is my point of view - I agree that the Western countries are totally wrong about invading Iraq and Afghanistan and I have said that many times before. I believe that Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush should be in jail and I protest against the participatuon myf my country in the war of Afghanistan. I agree that "our culture" is far from being perfect and many things have to be improved. I never had the attitude "right or wrong - my country", I am always critical of every government and all kinds of pressure. I certainly do defend the variety of cultures and I defend the freedom to practice any religion. As to terrorism - terrorism wasn't much my point in this discussion - terrorists are so few that I would never blame them on "the Muslims" (although we do have a terrorist problem in my country and it would be wrong to close our eyes.) We do have secret service reports and we did have a 911 court case which ended in the conviction of some (Muslim) offenders. But with all my criticism and all my dissatisfaction with the state of "our culture": there is much progress and there a good sides of "my culture" which I find are worth defending. For example the head of my government is a woman and our foreign minister is an openly gay man - although I am far from happy with their politics I think it is a good thing that a woman can be the leader of my country these days and a gay man can be openly gay and still be accepted by the public - 65 years after gays were killed in concentration camps. I think that the increase of freedom and tolerance is enormous for a country that has a very short democratic tradition. And I think it's really ridiculous that we should throw "our culture" overboard to suit a minority instead of developing and improving it. The burqua is not required by the Quran, millions of Muslim women are religious without wearing it and I simply do not want our children to have a role model like this. The burqua is extremist and it's naive to believe otherwise. If a woman does not want to go on the street without a burqua she is not fit to teach my daughter, that is my opinion and it happens to be the opinion of the school boards, too - because it is not allowed. Of course, a woman can wear whatever she wants in her free time but for the working hours she has to adopt the usual clothing. If a teacher is a punk she cannot come to work with hundreds of piercings and pink hair - there are just limits to the personal freedom at ALL workplaces and the school is a very sensitive area because parents must be sure that their kids are not exposed to any extremist influences. Actually, I would not want my daughter been taught by a Catholic nun, either, I think this is just as extremist as a woman in a burqua.(Teachers in my country are public servants and they must swear on the constitution to be employed. All children must go to school until they are 16 years old even if they do not graduate, you cannot be home schooled unless there are very grave reasons.) It is true that many girls are under pressure with "beauty idols" but that is a totally other story. I do not see that the alternative to a burqua is anorexia - problems like anorexia must be solved by educating the girls and working on progress in society - not falling back to the 1950s. My initial point was about the lack of integration in our Turkish community and the social consequences from that. Of course everybody can speak the language they want. But if they do not learn the language of the country they fail in succeeding in this society and the society does not want to pay for this "right". I am sure in Turkey they would not be able to live on social welfare all their lives just refusing to learn something and to contribute to society. To make it clear: I am not in favour of cutting social welfare but we cannot afford a community that is so unwilling to be a part of this society. There must be a way to demand from immigrants that they learn the language and make a living in this country - they are not Arabs, they are Germans and their loyalty must be with the country they live in at some point. I really can relate to what magicalfreddie said about the Korean community - we have that in many cities and Germany is not even as big as Montana with 82 million people. We need to solve this issue. |
| john bodega 28.01.2010 04:51 |
Yara wrote: "If Jews cannot fully integrate [because Jews used to uphold their cultural values and build close communities wherever they went], we have to do *something* about them". It was known as the "Jewish Question".And the solution? Hollywood. |
| Yara 28.01.2010 05:08 |
YourValentine wrote: A very interesting discussion spreading far beyond the original issues. Yara, it was me who said that she would not want to have her daughter being taught by a woman dressed in a burqua. I am not surprised to get Hitler and the Holocaust thrown back to me, that is normal in such discussions and I am not offended. Hey, ok, but I didn't throw these thing back at you - it was the Holocaust Rememberance Day yesterday. I really didn't keep in my mind the name of the user who had made the point, I tend to focus on the arguments. But if it was you, then, ok...you know better what's best for your daughter. And for sure you're in a better position to know what's best for your country too! I don't know what kinds of issues you guys are going through. So who am I to prescribe the UNIVERSAL FREEDOM RECEIPT? : -))))) So be it...I wouldn't be allowed to teach your daughter, then, but I can guarantee you that she'd learn MORE MATHS with me than with most teachers out there. And I'd never think of bringing my religion into the class room. But as I said, in crucial public facilities, I think it's fair to demand people to dress in a more "neutral" way, so to speak; still, I'd like to think that the way I dress, weird as it may seem, would not prompt people to judge me solely on that basis. But I can understand the demand for such restrictions in the teaching environment of a public facility. It makes sense - I'd agree with that, even though it's not my "ideal". It's so unlikely your daughter or anyone's daughter would take me as a role model...she'd probably poke fun at me, together with her school mates. : )))) I think people are too scared. To the point of, voilà, thinking that a woman in a burqha would be taken as a role model by an ordinary German girl. Or a nun. But, yes, I agree that in public schools the clothes should be at least "religion neutral". I think it's fair and I'd support such a thing, even though it's not my ideal of how things should work: I think we should all accept each other for what we are, provided we're not out there to do harm and evil, by learning to live daily with the difference, instead of marginalizing it. --------- Have a nice day, lady. [shaking hands and taking pictures] Cheers! |
| YourValentine 28.01.2010 06:03 |
Yara, I am sure you do not dress so unusually that you would have a problem to teach in a German public school. The burqua is a statement - just look at the Iranian revolution: how women dressed before the revolution and how they dressed after it. Women who still wore Western clothes were dragged off the streets and punished. I am totally for the right of women to wear what they want - I am not suggesting we should act like the Iranians, just the other way round. But in school I would not want a woman with a burqua making a statement. Actually, in Turkey women are not allowed to wear scarves in the university, school and other public places (students in Germany can - of course - wear what they want). About the Holocaust/Hitler thing - I was not offended and I know you did not mean it personally. The issue is always close to our minds and it has an effect on the way we deal with such issues - clearly frightened to be racists, xenophobics and intolerant. In fact we are so frightened that we are totally unable to deal with an immigration issue in a normal way. It's mostly extremes - either overly politically correct or right wing hate speech. When someone points out the flaws of our immigration rules or names facts and dates which are unfavourable for the Turkish community (lack of language skills, high school drop out rate, high criminal activity, high unemployment rate) they can be sure to be called Nazis. |
| The Real Wizard 28.01.2010 11:45 |
Yara wrote: So be it...I wouldn't be allowed to teach your daughter, then, but I can guarantee you that she'd learn MORE MATHS with me than with most teachers out there. Genuine question here.. Suppose you lost your job and were out of work for a couple years. The job offer finally comes in, and it's from a school with a no burqa rule. So you're faced with the choice of teaching math or keeping your burqa on - what would you choose? Would you be willing to scale down your burqa to a hijab that revealed your entire face, if that's what the school's rules would permit? |
| Yara 28.01.2010 12:46 |
YourValentine wrote: Yara, I am sure you do not dress so unusually that you would have a problem to teach in a German public school. The burqua is a statement - just look at the Iranian revolution: how women dressed before the revolution and how they dressed after it. Women who still wore Western clothes were dragged off the streets and punished. I am totally for the right of women to wear what they want - I am not suggesting we should act like the Iranians, just the other way round. But in school I would not want a woman with a burqua making a statement. Actually, in Turkey women are not allowed to wear scarves in the university, school and other public places (students in Germany can - of course - wear what they want). About the Holocaust/Hitler thing - I was not offended and I know you did not mean it personally. The issue is always close to our minds and it has an effect on the way we deal with such issues - clearly frightened to be racists, xenophobics and intolerant. In fact we are so frightened that we are totally unable to deal with an immigration issue in a normal way. It's mostly extremes - either overly politically correct or right wing hate speech. When someone points out the flaws of our immigration rules or names facts and dates which are unfavourable for the Turkish community (lack of language skills, high school drop out rate, high criminal activity, high unemployment rate) they can be sure to be called Nazis. Yes, that’s my point: it is a statement. More precisely, it is part of their cultural heritage, and the State should not, in my view, be accorded the power to judge their history! People are making statements all the time. Think about it, just a minor example: we’re allowed to go out with a T-shirt with Che Guevara stamped on it, aren’t we? We are indeed. Now, take his leading biographer, John Lee Anderson: he wrote a mammoth book on the guy. I thought it’d be make for an interesting reading, and I went through the whole thing. I’m not easily shocked, BUT I CAN’T DENY THE GUY WAS A COOL-BLOODED MURDERER. Whether all those extrajudicial executions and murders were legitimate or not, that’s up to each one’s ideology and morals: people think, up until today, that yes, it was legitimate, that he was killing for a noble reason. Same goes, to a certain extent, to Lenin. Is anyone going to forbid me to use a shirt with the figure of Lenin stamped on it? No. In fact, there are socialist parties up until TODAY. What does history tell us? Well, among the people who said they represented these ideas are such cruel murders as Stalin, Mao and Castro. Tariq-Ali is fully entitled to publish a book with Castro and Chávez on the cover with angel wings. Cool. Their victims must think that this is offensive, but it’s a statement: fair play. It is fair play to the extent that STATES ARE NOT THERE TO BE THE JUDGES OF HISTORY. But if they start to act on these ideologies, well, then they should be arrested: they have no right to kill whoever it is in a democratic state like Germany. And I think that’s correct. I actually disagree with laws making holocaust denial a crime. For exactly the same reason: people should be allowed to speak up their minds, even if I don’t like what they’re saying. Now, let’s get back to the woman in the burqha: isn’t she making a much MILDER statement than all those I quoted above? Yes, she is indeed. But that’s not my main point. My main point is: yes, it is a statement done by the “burqha woman” in a largely Christian culture. BUT: IF WE ARE SURE ABOUT OUR VALUES, SHOULDN’T WE BE ABLE TO IGNORE THESE STATEMENTS, INSOFAR AS THEY CAN’T CAUSE US ANY HARM AT ALL? OR: IF WE FAIL TO IGNORE THEM, ISN’T IT BECAUSE WE’RE ACTUALLY TOO AFRAID OF PEOPLE BEING…PERSUADED BY THAT? Is this fear reasonable in 21th Century Germany? Does anyone think that a woman in a burqha will be taken as a model or a paragon of anything by the German youth? Is an ordinary German girl going to be attracted to this? No! So why creating more barriers, having the state pass judgments on their culture and history and actually discriminating against what’s for most of women who wear it in Western culture a peaceful statement? WHY CAN’T WE ACCEPT IT AS ONLY A STATEMENT ABOUT HERSELF, AND NOT ABOUT GERMANY, EUROPE OR THE WORLD? Why? [-: falling on the floor in desperation] I do use a veil sometimes. Is it all the time? No. But sometimes, yes. Do I respect public facilities and take it off? Yes. I think it’s fair to demand something like this from Muslim women teaching in schools, and so on. But do I use it sometimes when I go to the mall, or walk in the streets or even go to the park to exercise? Yes, I do. Is it weird to see a girl with a veil and a long gown and Hebrew letters stamped on it walking in the park? It is absolutely weird. People avoid you – I mean “me”, of course. But the thing is: I DON’T WANT TO BE SHOWING MY FACE ALL THE TIME. Why the state should force me to show my face to people I don’t know? I’m not showing my shoulders. Not even in a public school I’d accept doing it. Does it mean that I’ll preach the Torah in the classroom and stop talking about Maths? No! If I were asked about it, I’d simply say that I have a scar. If a German girl came to me and said: “Frau Yara, I’m afraid. I’m pregnant and don’t want to tell my family about it”. Would I be as insensitive and ruthless as to say: “Well, you better not, because you’re going to hell”? Of course not! I’d say: “I’m sure your mom loves you more than anything in this world. You can trust her. Now let’s get back to our Maths, right?” But then she replies: “Frau Yara, I want to abort. What do you think?” I’d say: “Sweetheart, I think you should talk to your mom about it all. But, ultimately, I respect whatever the choice you make. I’m going to teach you the same way I teach the others and you’ll LEARN MATHS AS LONG AS YOU’RE MY STUDENT”. So why are we – Jews, Muslims and Christians who still hold to their religious tradition – being so discriminated against? Why should an atheist have more rights to her body than me? I’d not be allowed to teach in Germany/France. People would ask me to take off the scarf, the symbols, the Jewish stars, the Hebrew letters, until I’m using shirt and jeans. Let’s say the German girl likes Frau Yara, the teacher, to the point of wanting to change her ways. “Frau Yara is so impressive…I’d like to dress like her”. “Frau Yara, what do I do to become Jewish”? I’d say: “Why should you want to become Jewish?” “Because you rock, Frau Yara”. I’d answer: “Thanks, dear, but you’re just fine the way you are. You don’t have to change anything for people to like you”. That’s what my religion teaches me. That’s my morals: people’s privacy and intimacy, and their right to their own personalities, are sacred. Period. That’s not negotiable. Would I be a dangerous and threatening influence to Germans or the French? The Turks are a different issue. They’re faring badly in all these aspects, as you pointed out, and they’re dressing just fine to German standards, I guess. They are stating something different – I don’t know what it is. You guys know and can address it. Turks are dumber? No! Turks are more violent than other people? No! So why are they either refusing education or being prevented by parents to fully embrace their studies?So Turks lagging behind is a different issue from this one, if that makes any sense. |
| The Real Wizard 28.01.2010 14:09 |
Yara wrote: But the thing is: I DON’T WANT TO BE SHOWING MY FACE ALL THE TIME. Why the state should force me to show my face to people I don’t know? What do you have to hide? Is it a form of safety to conceal your identity? Is it a fear of some kind? Does it bother you that people avoid you? Obviously the negative feelings you get from that reaction don't outweigh whatever positive sense you get from wearing the burqa. I'm genuinely interested in learning about what is behind this mentality. |
| YourValentine 28.01.2010 14:46 |
Sorry but we are talking about very differnt things, apparently. I do not know about your country but here a teacher would not wear a Che Guevara shirt in school, it's just not appropriate clothing for a teacher at his work place. Teachers also are not allowed to wear political emblems or stickers "vote canditate abc" in school. That does not mean they cannot discuss Che Guevara or elections in school and voice their opinion. We have no school prayer or oath on the flag or other patriotic stuff like other countries. Teachers are supposed to be neutral and if they do not want to follow the rules they must find another job. From all of your posts here I cannot imagine a situation that you as a teacher would like to wear a veil while teaching your students, it would disturb the communication greatly if the students talk into a veil and not into the face of their teacher. I think I explained the reason for the social problems we have with Turks: they do not send their children to kindergarten and speak only Turkish at home (not all of them of course!!). When the kids come to school they often speak no German, so they need extra language courses. In the long run they are disadvantaged, hence the hogh drop-out rate. Girls are often kept away from school and have no chance to learn any profession. Since unemployment is high and a good education is needed to get a job, unemployment rate is also very high in the Turkish community, mainly among young men who are more involved into crimes than any other group in this country as a result of the unemployment. Like Bob I would also like to know why it is so important for you to hide your face :-) I am sure most people would like to see it. |
| Yara 28.01.2010 14:48 |
Sir GH wrote:Yara wrote: So be it...I wouldn't be allowed to teach your daughter, then, but I can guarantee you that she'd learn MORE MATHS with me than with most teachers out there.Genuine question here.. Suppose you lost your job and were out of work for a couple years. The job offer finally comes in, and it's from a school with a no burqa rule. So you're faced with the choice of teaching math or keeping your burqa on - what would you choose? Would you be willing to scale down your burqa to a hijab that revealed your entire face, if that's what the school's rules would permit? I can't speak about the burqha. I do use a veil sometimes, mainly to cover part of my hair; sometimes, I cover part of my face too. Well, hair is one of women's sensual attributes. I want to fully display it and be gorgeously beautiful only to the person I love dearly. It's something special that I can give to this person. It doesn't matter if he's going to let me down or something. But my heart will be loyal to him as long as I love him. And that's one of the ways I have of showing my affection. Being especially beautiful to him. Does it mean that I get reckless when it comes to other people? No! The veil covering my hair is all very finely adorned and trimmed. There are beautiful figures and symbols on it, sometimes only colorful flowers, Jewish stars and some Hebrew words. It has the double function of concealing my hair, which I think I must preserve to special occasions, and displaying something beautiful to other people all the same - not something gross or offensive, but delicate and gentle. As for the face: sometimes I don't want to show my face because I'm not pure. I have done bad things, I haven't gone through purification, and I think it is wrong for me to walk around showing my face as if I had to be proud of my behavior. Other times, it's because the people I use to meet start getting too gross and rude, and I then I think they shouldn't be allowed to see my face - they will make eye-contact, and that's it. I cover my face in shame for myself and for them. I’d try to translate this into my experience: I do dress in a way that is likely to be banned from French or German schools. Let’s take these items separately: long, very typical ornamented dress with religious motifs; scarf with Hebrew letters and starts; if not a veil, at least something to cover the top of my head with, even if adorned only with flowers. I wouldn’t wear a veil covering my face in the classroom. I think that’s disrespectful to students – there has to be an open, friendly atmosphere in the classroom, and they have to be able to trust me. They, my students, would have the absolute right to see my face and know much more about who I am than other people. People would be able to see my face, yes, my hands and that’s it. I would prefer not to exhibit either my hair or my neck. There comes the Canadian employer. “Hey…so, are you Yara?” “Yes, sir. Nice to meet you”. “Ok, Yara, see you soon. Bye”. You see? I have been already discriminated against even before doing the interview! But I need the job! So apply for another one. This time, although it hurts me big time and makes me deeply sad, I take off whatever it is that happens to be covering my hair. “Hello! Are you Yara?” “Yes. How are you, Mr. Canadian?” “I’m fine. Well, I call you next month”. Second time I’ve been discriminated against without having the chance to do the interview. I’m starting to get hungry!!!!!!!!!! I apply for another job. This time, crying already and feeling humiliated, I take off the scarf. “Hey, there. So you’re Yara?” “Yes! How are you doing, Mr. Canadian?” “Well, I’m fine. So, may I call you next week?”. THE FOURTH TIME! I’m beginning to get desperate. I schedule an interview with a school director. I buy a long, simple dress, without any religious motifs, and am still not showing anything besides my hands and my face. “Hey, Yara. You must be Yara”. “Will you call me only next week, Mr. Canadian?” “What?” “Sorry. How are you, Mr. Canadian?” “Great. So, let’s see…wow, very impressive grades! You did tremendously well in our test.” “Thanks. I try to do my best, Mr. Canadian”. “So, Yara, let’s try having an experimental class. You have 50 minutes”. [class time elapsed] “Wonderful! You did really well.” “Cool!!!”. “Unfortunately we can only hire one person…”. “I see… did anyone fair better?” “Not exactly. But we think we need someone with a different profile to communicate with students. YOU SEE, YARA, TEACHING IS NOT ONLY ABOUT IMPARTING THE KNOWLEDGE”. “I see…”. “You studied in many different countries, didn’t you?” “Yes…” “Long time in Israel, wow. That’s cool. How’s Israel?” “Israel is lovely. You should go there with your wife and kids”. “You bet I will. Germany, nice…and onto Brazil! Soccer! That’s terrific too. Now, I’d love to go to Brazil. So how long have you been in Canada?” “I’ve been here for five years. I think it’s in my job permit.” “Yes. Well, I wish you luck here in Canada, Ms. Yara!” “Thanks, Mr. Canadian, sorry for taking up your time”. “No problem.” Do you know what? The next time I’d have to be in front of the school in shirt and jeans begging for the job because I’m a foreigner! And there’s always a limit. I’d feel so humiliated that, yes, I wouldn’t have the courage to get out to work. So I’d rather go back to my country, for as much as I hoped to live a better life in Canada and make friends. But no one would like to be friends with someone so weird, even if I worked hard to earn their trust – why do I say that? I know that because I’ve been there before in other countries: you just don’t make friends. You get so isolated that you feel like starting to resort to your close community. But that’s depressing too. So… [Yara going back home] This is the world. Some think it’s good this way. Some think it’s not. From my point of view, it’s not as good as it could be. From your point of view, it’s wonderful, because I traded my freedom for a better life in Canada. It was my choice. I didn’t want to accept your customs. I’d never be a Canadian in spirit, just like my old fellow Italian worker. My habits, my accent, the way I dress and behave, that’d haunt me forever. So I’d finally go back home. And Mr. Canadian wouldn’t have to schedule more useless interviews and force himself to be kind and outgoing. |
| ParisNair 28.01.2010 15:05 |
About building Minarets...this structure of the mosque is traditionally used to remind the people when its time for prayer. The man climbs into the top floor of the minaret and screams at the top of his voice or announces into a microphone. Apart from this practical use, i have also read somewhere (or maybe someone told me) that minarets are built in such a way as to be the tallest religious structure of the locality, in order to symbolise the supremacy of islam over other religions. Is banning minarets warranted? Ridiculous- just a way (and a wrong way too) to get back at muslims to show who's the boss. The government would serve the people and country better by keeping an eye on the operations of the Mosque/Islamic religious schools- where they get the funds from, how the funds are utilised, what type of discussions take place inside, what type of arms and ammunition (if any) are kept inside. Such instituions are the fertile breeding grounds for polarising and communalising young mulims, and indeed even to recruit future suicide suckers. |
| Yara 28.01.2010 15:23 |
YourValentine wrote: Sorry but we are talking about very differnt things, apparently. I do not know about your country but here a teacher would not wear a Che Guevara shirt in school, it's just not appropriate clothing for a teacher at his work place. Teachers also are not allowed to wear political emblems or stickers "vote canditate abc" in school. That does not mean they cannot discuss Che Guevara or elections in school and voice their opinion. We have no school prayer or oath on the flag or other patriotic stuff like other countries. Teachers are supposed to be neutral and if they do not want to follow the rules they must find another job. From all of your posts here I cannot imagine a situation that you as a teacher would like to wear a veil while teaching your students, it would disturb the communication greatly if the students talk into a veil and not into the face of their teacher. I think I explained the reason for the social problems we have with Turks: they do not send their children to kindergarten and speak only Turkish at home (not all of them of course!!). When the kids come to school they often speak no German, so they need extra language courses. In the long run they are disadvantaged, hence the hogh drop-out rate. Girls are often kept away from school and have no chance to learn any profession. Since unemployment is high and a good education is needed to get a job, unemployment rate is also very high in the Turkish community, mainly among young men who are more involved into crimes than any other group in this country as a result of the unemployment. Like Bob I would also like to know why it is so important for you to hide your face :-) I am sure most people would like to see it. Yeah, but I don't think everyone should be allowed to see my face. It's a sacred part of my body. It's something so intimate: my face, in a sense, says A LOT about me. And I don't want anyone being able to search into my soul by looking at my face. I don't cover it all. It's not like I'm wearing a mask to hide my identity - people can see my eyes and part of my cheeks. I do take it off in public facilities or when I'm starting to get better acquainted with someone. ----------------- Now, I wasn't talking about schools. I agree that in schools teachers should not use veils, as I said. I wouldn't dare to use it myself - I find it disrespectful. My students have the right to know much more about myself than the casual person. And, as I said, it's important for them to be able to trust me or at least to feel they're in a friendly, light atmosphere. I still wouldn't be allowed to teach in Germany or France, because of the religious symbols and, eventually, something partially covering my hair with symbols on it. I'd only be allowed to teach, for sure, if I took all the religious motifs off and presented myself in a way that is degrading to me. Then, just as you said, I'd have to either look for another job or go back home. That's correct! I don't think this is wrong. I'd like things to be different? Yes. I'd like people to be able to respect my tradition? For sure. Does my tradition entails disrespect for other people? Not at all. Would I discuss Judaism in the classroom? As I said, no. Is it enough? No. That's not how the world works. I either assimilate or go find another job. Mine is a different point. It has much more to do with being accepted for what you are, with all your traditions and all your positive and negative aspects, than with anything else. Bob and I were not talking about school only. We're talking about me being a second-rate Canadian, for instance, for wearing a kind of cloth or having some customs which prevented me from being a CANADIAN IN SPIRIT, as Bob pointed out. On top of it, there's the accent, the struggle to communicate, all that - and I've been discriminated against in Europe for every one of these reasons: accent, clothing, ethnicity, everything. In Germany, a lady felt she had the right to slap my hand because I wanted to help her get some books that had fallen on the ground. She tried to do it a second time and I only avoided getting hit because I withdrawed my arm. I left the store crying. The police searched me once. They had me open my purse and got someone to check me up. I WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO RECEIVED THIS KIND OF TREATMENT among I don't know how many people. It was in a subway, I guess. When I asked "why only me", a woman replied: "We have nothing to be sorry about. We're doing our job. You may go". From all people, I was the only one who got this kind of treatment. Of course it was prejudice. This is life for people like us in Germany, France or whatever. So there's a part of me who says: "Well, life condition is so much better there. I may find a good job and enjoy a good life". On the other hand, I have to think twice because I'm likely to be isolated and forced to live in close communities for the rest of my life; I'm bound to be subjected to prejudice all the time - clothing, costums, ethnicity, accent, all that. The funny thing is: I've been going to New York for a couple of years already. I had never been so well-received in a foreign country before. And it was pretty much like that all across the U.S. I'm not saying the U.S is perfect. But I didn't go through anything near what I experienced in Europe. |
| ParisNair 28.01.2010 15:35 |
Sir GH wrote:
In Canada, they proposed a bill to require all women to reveal their faces when voting, just so the folks in charge could be sure of the person's identity... but unfortunately it was thrown out.
Really! That is so surprising. Compare that with the judgement passed in the Indian Supreme Court just a few days ago in regards to issuanse of Voter ID cards to women in burqas- the Supreme Court has clearly stated that burqa clad women will not be given voters identity card if they refuse to remove their veil for having photograph being taken for having their names on the roles. Check it out - link |
| magicalfreddiemercury 29.01.2010 09:37 |
Yara wrote: There comes the Canadian employer. “Hey…so, are you Yara?” “Yes, sir. Nice to meet you”. “Ok, Yara, see you soon. Bye”. You see? I have been already discriminated against even before doing the interview! Say I own a small business, and place a help-wanted ad in the local paper. My clients are mostly middle-aged, white-collar, English-speaking Americans. Someone replies to my ad and we make an appointment to meet. From her email response, this person seems like the perfect candidate. However, when she arrives at my door, she's wearing black lipstick, thick eyeliner, a low-cut blouse, miniskirt and thigh-high boots, and she has a tattoo going from the side of her neck down her arm. Not one religious symbol adorns her body or clothing. Will I consider hiring her? Uh... no. She may be the perfect candidate for any non-public work I might have, but face-to-face, she'd make my clients uncomfortable. Why? Because they'd need to interact with her and the immediate impression they'd have is that she couldn't possibly understand their needs since her focus is clearly on an attitude or outlook in contrast with theirs. Hiring her would be unfair to them and to me. I want customers to come into my store and feel welcomed and at ease. I want them to be willing to stick around so I can sell them plenty of goods. If they're going to do a double-take, I want it to be at my products, not my employee. Her appearance would chase my clientele right out the door, and make me feel the need to apologize for her. Rather than put myself, my business or my customers through that, I'll simply look for someone more representative of the local demographics. She is the odd one out. Should I feel beholden to her because she is expressing herself? Should I put her right to do so ahead of my client's rights? Or my rights? You say you are an expert in teaching math, well, this young woman might be an expert in the position for which she's applying. I will never know, nor will I care, because the difficulties she represents for all I mentioned above far outweigh any benefit she might provide. A shame for both of us. It's not solely about religious adornments and discrimination. Wear your religious attire if you are comfortable doing so. But do not expect those who do not share your views to be comfortable - or accepting - around you. To contrast what I just said, I'll point out the difference between wearing, say, a t-shirt with a negative slogan on it, and wearing religious garb... religion has been fueling wars for eons. Over the past decade, the gap between religions, and between religious and non-religious people, has widened. Tensions are undeniably high. Those of faith are defending their faith with fervor against the influx of other faiths and other faiths are fighting back. The last administration in my country insinuated religion in almost every decision it made, further dividing this country, further fueling frustration over anything overtly-religious. Will I, personally, feel uncomfortable speaking with a Muslim woman wearing a headscarf, or with an orthodox Jewish woman wearing a wig? No. I see it every day, just as I see Indian women wearing Saris (sp?). I find the difference in cultures exciting and alluring. But if a woman covered except for her eyes comes into my space, I will see her as a symbol of all that divides us. There is an arrogance behind that veil - you alluded to it yourself when you said, "I cover my face in shame for myself and for them." Though your intention might be 'pure', the action and words to explain it do not seem so. You feel others are sometimes not good enough for you and sometimes you are not good enough for them. How morbidly archaic that thought process seems in this modern world. We all feel disgust at ourselves and others from time to time, but do we literally hang/hide our heads in shame? Or do we try to better ourselves or, perhaps, avoid those who would insult or hurt us? Punishing perceived impurity with an act of defiance and vanity by not permitting others to see the 'beauty' of one's face is an act that simply oozes with contradictions. |
| john bodega 29.01.2010 11:21 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote: However, when she arrives at my door, she's wearing black lipstick, thick eyeliner, a low-cut blouse, miniskirt and thigh-high boots, and she has a tattoo going from the side of her neck down her arm. Not one religious symbol adorns her body or clothing.... I'd buy that for a dollar!! |
| magicalfreddiemercury 29.01.2010 11:48 |
Zebonka12 wrote:magicalfreddiemercury wrote: However, when she arrives at my door, she's wearing black lipstick, thick eyeliner, a low-cut blouse, miniskirt and thigh-high boots, and she has a tattoo going from the side of her neck down her arm. Not one religious symbol adorns her body or clothing.... I'd buy that for a dollar!! Well... that's not exactly where I was going with that but... O. Kay. lol |
| john bodega 29.01.2010 12:03 |
I apologise, this isn't the thread for Robocop quotes. I'll find a Jim Hutton one instead. :D |
| YourValentine 29.01.2010 12:13 |
Great post, magicalmercury, I agree with every word. As for the police searching you, Yara, I am sorry. Police is not allowed to select ethnic groups for security checks but we know that they do it all the time, anyway. Mainly after the 2006 bombs planted into various trains by Islamists from the Lebanon (the bombs luckily did not blow off) they search mainly people looking like Muslims. Yes, we should take people for what they are and not for what they wear. Unfortunately, you will be judged for what you wear in many cases. |
| Yara 29.01.2010 14:23 |
YourValentine wrote: Great post, magicalmercury, I agree with every word. As for the police searching you, Yara, I am sorry. Police is not allowed to select ethnic groups for security checks but we know that they do it all the time, anyway. Mainly after the 2006 bombs planted into various trains by Islamists from the Lebanon (the bombs luckily did not blow off) they search mainly people looking like Muslims. Yes, we should take people for what they are and not for what they wear. Unfortunately, you will be judged for what you wear in many cases.Hey, you have nothing to be sorry about. It was not you doing the search and singling me out. As for the cop, well, he was doing his job - maybe the people instructing him may not be doing their job as well as they can; maybe they've been following an unwise political path. "Maybe" because all this can be argued and discussed. In fact, there's a German musician I know who thought that it was absolutely reasonable for the cop to search me and answer the way he did; he even thought that I was being very arrogant. Did he have tons of arguments we discussed? Yes, he did. And I discussed all them in a respectful way, trying to learn what was worth learning, and dismissing what I thought was not right. One of my arguments were: Germany is one of Israel's major financial and military supporters, only losing to the U.S; Israel launched a vicious attack in Lebabon, and it had already done so in the 80's. Many German U-boats and weapons are seen by Lebanese as symbols of Israeli military ruthlessness. I said: "Well, Israel is not a good candidate for receiving high-technology weaponry and money right now; it's not really deserving it". That'd be a good way to dimish the risk of terrorism in Germany, though, of course, that wouldn't solve the problem. One of my best friends is from Lebanon; I've been there many times. Despite all the conflicts, most people don't care a jot about whether I'm Jewish or am wearing Jewish garment. I like the Lebanese in general. I had a terrific time there. I know people who didn't have such a good experience. It's life! Maybe, who knows, just as you said, the guy who did the search prevented me from being blown off in many other rides! Is it a fair argument that can be reasonably discussed? For sure. After many debates, I'd probably disagree with that, for a number of reasons, but I'm always looking forward, as I did in the case of that musician, to listen to what people have to say. There have been many people, police or not, who have mistreated me in Germany, including the lady in that store. It was just an example. She probably was thinking that I was going to hit her...or steal something. None of this is the "fault" or whatever of any German who was not directly involved, even if he, just as this guy, thinks this is right: he is entitled to his opinions as much as I am. He'd be actually responsible, in the full sense of the word, if, and only if, instead of voicing his opinion, he bullied me or hit me, just like the lady in the store or that cop. He treated me most kindly, even though we had disagreed bitterly on political issues. Not that I don't believe that people shouldn't be held accountable for their opinions in a democracy - they should, but not in all cases. There's a fine line here between forbidding dissent and holding people morally accountable. It's maybe time, I guess, for you guys to be less worried about the "Nazi" charges. There are probably as many different Germans as there are people - judging a whole people, largely composed of people who had barely, if at all, been born during World War II for the crimes comitted by the Nazis would be simply unfair and wrong, in my view. Let's hope that, in more peaceful times, things change for the better. I have things to improve on my side, for sure, Germans have their issues to work out too. Muslims have a lot of things to think about too! |
| Yara 29.01.2010 14:32 |
Magicalfreddiemercury: I hope you take it lightly, because I meant it this way: well, I do have the right to my vanity, my sense of proud and my ambitions! Some people change themselves to the point of getting almost unrecognizable by doing plastic surgery; some people have breast-implants; I wear a veil sometimes. Do I see any problem about people having their surgeries? No. I wouldn't do it, but I must admit that people who do it in a fine way start to look really better. The veil thing is funny because most of our industry is largely engaged in trying to turn people into something different than they are, physically and emotionally: it's one of the most profitable industries. It has its good and it has its bad aspects. Just like my veil. It has some good sides to me, it has its disadvantages. We can't be so face-showing fanatics anyway, can't we? No plastic surgery, no make-up? Oh, come on. I want to have the right to resort at least to the latter without people charging me of "hiding the defects of my skin". Oh, but these charges inevitably come when people see you with, and then without, make-up. : ))) I don’t think this is a fair representation of what I’ve written. I never claimed that people should accept me or hire me for any job; no, not at all. On the contrary: I said that the Mr. Canadian from my example is…correct in his attitude! Do read it again more carefully. I even put Mr. Canadian’s words in capitals when I said that: “Teaching is not only imparting knowledge…”. And there’s a legitimate point here. My point is about public policy. It’s the moment when the state starts to deny me certain rights under the assumption that the way I dress supposedly defies the values of a certain culture or put it under threat. And, as I said, these values are constantly being defied in much more aggressive ways, sometimes even through very practical statements translated into military operations, but when it comes to the peaceful observance of one’s tradition, a huge amount of prejudice steps in. I never, even once, suggested that teachers should be allowed to cover their faces: I think women in burqhas should be accorded the same rights as other people as far as she’s holding on to her traditions in a peaceful way and within reasonable limits. I OPPOSED SARKOZY’S high-talk about teaching freedom to the “savages”. The way it was presented to the public – it sounded racist, it sounded offensive. Now, let's go to the answer. : -))) I had to break it in two parts. : ) |
| Yara 29.01.2010 14:33 |
I’d never apply for a job defined by market-generated values which induce conformity and uniformity. I would never dream of applying for a job in this store. But, yes, I do make a point of being able not to wear a veil, but to dress myself in a way that I feel comfortable about and still be allowed to teach. I’d even accept people monitoring my classes, I wouldn’t mind – the issue is that there’s a point where the state starts to demand you to abandon so much of your tradition that you feel humiliated. There “were”, well, there still are, but there were times when, well, BLACKS were not really considered a good option to serve WHITE-COLLAR costumers. Is there AN ECONOMIC LOGIC ABOUT THAT? Yup. Is it still racist? Oh, yeah. Is it absolutely logical, economically speaking, TO INVADE IRAQ or being prejudicial about BLACKS? Of course! Sometimes the market demands exactly that – a certain degree of prejudice. There’s no imperialism without two things: racism and xenophobia. It’s never happened. It probably never will. As YourValentine said: you'll be searched for looking like a Muslim. This is prejudice, of course. People feel safer because they regard it as a security measure. Fair play. But there's a generelization at play which follows the very same logic of racism. Fair play...racism and prejudice is in our everyday lives, not only in state actions. It's hard to think that such things will ever be effaced from society. Do I think this is the ideal? Again, I don’t. Is this how the world works? As I said, yes. I don’t bang my head against the wall. But I try to stand up for rights I believe I have in certain circumstances. And my fight is a peaceful, legal one, not an armed struggle. Notice that arrogance is not the same as making simple value judgments. You make the latter all the time. Everybody does. The way I express certain discomforts in my personal life takes on the shape of my cultural formation: in school, as a student, many times, or most often, I don’t have the option of simply getting away from people I don’t want to be with because they are either disrespecting me or being incredibly gross and rude, capable of a secular sexism which is far beyond anything I experience in my religious community. Then, and only then, and not SOLELY for this reason, I use a veil sometimes, not as an act of arrogance, but as a result of a judgment I’m entitled to make, and the kind of which we can’t avoid if we want to even get up in the morning. I don’t have to read Hume or Kant to understand that we operate by doing all kinds of judgments involving facts and values. The way we express them, as long as it’s peaceful, should not be banned from the public sphere, to my mind. And, yes, we do feel shame for other people – it’s a common, natural, human emotion which we express in a lot of different ways. Mine is not worse than someone simply leaving the place without saying a word; I may have the right to be in that place and, still, not want people to see my face. They have PLENTY of things to look at. This is not arrogance. These are situations where a woman, especially in very sexist cultures, as Brazil is in many ways, just wants to keep enjoying her rights without feeling utterly uncomfortable. The veil has other significances in my culture. I make rituals of purification – I don’t feel at ease about going out showing my face in the case I haven’t gone through them. But one thing I’d never think about doing: THINKING THAT THE VEIL, BY ITSELF, IS A SOLUTION FOR MY PROBLEMS. No – if I act badly or wrongly, I don’t cover it all with a veil: I actually try to improve my behavior and be more gentle, patient, kind or whatever it is that triggered my error. That’s, again, what my religion and my elementary morals demand of me: the only difference is that I sometimes put a veil to feel comfortable about myself and in my relation to…God – I’m religious. I do think God exists. Do religious Jews are stimulated to talk about their religion? Not at all! On the contrary: hassidim are always advised to respect other people’s rights, and their sacred right to their own personalities and histories, and try to be as holy as possible WITHIN YOURSELF; and also by trying to do good in the world, including in our everyday lives. This is my religion. So, when people equate me, in some way, with Bush or Bin Laden, why shouldn’t I take that for what it is – PREJUDICE? A generalization which results in prejudice. If the prejudice is embedded in a culture – like in the shop you mentioned – there’s nothing much one can do about it. Ultimately, I think, as I just said, that people are just terribly afraid because, for one thing, they’re not very sure about their own values after so many years of wars, clever shifts in the ways of domination and exploitation, and so on. YourValentine put it really well when she said that many Germans are still haunted by the Nazi heritage. It’s a heritage that brings shame and doubts about one’s own culture, even if the German, as most Germans, are opposed to Nazis as fiercely as a Holocaust survivor would be. My point again: I DON’T DEMAND PEOPLE TO LOVE ME. I want to be accorded the same rights as other people – I think it is very unreasonable to deny me the right of teaching because of religious symbols, when I know perfectly well that the neutral point is often the authoritarian point. Do I go out of my mind about it? No! I look for jobs I can do, just the one I have now. For instance: I do work in a department of science. No one demands me to wear “neutral clothes” – why? Because that’s how a department of science works…it doesn’t matter a jot to people how I’m dressed as long as I can do the job. There are young people who work with computers who go to work wearing shorts and T-shirt and piercing and tattoo: do THEY COMPLAIN AGAINST ME? NO! Not at all. We get together really fine. Do I think they’re doing something wrong? Not at all, again. So, in the store you mentioned, I’d be highly unwelcomed, for sure; in a Physics department, not so – I’ve already studied abroad, and I’m asked to return, and the question about dressing never came up. This is all I’m saying. That’s the way the world goes round. Each one tries to make his or her living taking advantage of his or her qualities and trying to circumvent his/her negative points. Most people are out there to live a peaceful and decent life. We follow our own, very peculiar ways, because, well, we’re different. And as long as we all try to do it peacefully and respectfully, then fine. People who break the law should be punished. And when the State breaks the law, which happens quite often, it has to be held accountable to citizens – either because it fostered or promoted prejudice, injustice, harm, humiliation or destitution. I fight for mine. I have been reasonably successful as far as the U.S, the country you live in, is concerned. There seems to be a positive exchange: I work and abide by the rules, people respect the way I dress. Most of the time in New York people don’t even notice the way I’m dressed. It’s not an issue. They’re too busy leading their own lives. In Europe, well, that’s not exactly so, even if, as anyone else, I want ENTER A SHOP AS COSTUMER, not asking for a job. I could make a huge fuss about the way I was treated in FNAC at Les Halles once. I don’t. I don’t like victimizing. I know there’s prejudice. I know there are tons of rationals for it. I do my best to overcome these barriers. Nice discussion. Looking forward to read more about it from you guys, even if I may not have the time to answer anything. I'm past the time I should have left already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Cheers you all, great topic. |
| More Cowbell 29.01.2010 18:39 |
Ban religion as a whole. It's all total bollocks. Believing in some so called deity who may or may not exist & then worshipping them for a lifetime? I have better things to do with my life thanks very much. I may be proven wrong, but I'm gonna have a blast before I shuffle off this mortal coil. Religion is & always has been the biggest cause of arguements, war & death in the history of the World. Get born, live life to the full, die. Why believe in something only to be proven after death? |
| The Real Wizard 30.01.2010 01:00 |
To say the least, your posts were interesting and a very good read, Yara. I'm not immune to changing my stance on any particular subject, but I'm still not convinced in this case. You cover your face since you think it's too sacred for most people to see, but most of those people will judge you because it's highly unusual. Sounds like a fair exchange to me. Your life is your choice, so I can only hope you're truly happy with your decisions. Magicalfreddiemercury said, "You feel others are sometimes not good enough for you and sometimes you are not good enough for them. How morbidly archaic that thought process seems in this modern world." I couldn't have said it better myself. In fact, that entire post with the hypothetical workplace example was most excellent. As for the 'Canadian in spirit' comment, I was referring to the ability to speak at least one of the official languages, not one's choice of attire. Please don't twist my words for your advantage. You almost sound like a politician that way. I certainly don't think anyone is less Canadian for wearing something unusual. As long as they're lawful, able to communicate with their fellow citizens, and contribute to society by working and paying taxes (save those who are not healthy enough to do so), then they have a place in this country. I'm sure most of my fellow citizens would agree. |
| john bodega 30.01.2010 07:55 |
I'm going to start a Church of Floyd. No one will stop me from wearing a picture of David Gilmour. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 30.01.2010 08:06 |
Zebonka12 wrote: I'm going to start a Church of Floyd.No one will stop me from wearing a picture of David Gilmour. reply: you konw that Jedi is an official religon in the UK? |
| john bodega 30.01.2010 08:45 |
Ha! I remember when they tried to get that going here during a Census .... |
| ParisNair 30.01.2010 11:28 |
This is such a serious and relevant thread, and being an Asian it is interesting to know the opinions of the common westerners on the subject. But the posts are so verbose, can y'all possibly make your future posts less lengthier? Thanks! |
| magicalfreddiemercury 01.02.2010 09:52 |
ParisNair wrote: This is such a serious and relevant thread, and being an Asian it is interesting to know the opinions of the common westerners on the subject. But the posts are so verbose, can y'all possibly make your future posts less lengthier? Thanks! lol. Sorry. I know I tried to keep my responses to the point but I just couldn't make it happen. To sum up my opinion - Everyone knows religion is a hot-button issue. It has divided people for centuries and continues to divide us today. While some people feel the need to express their religious convictions by dressing in a certain way, I think it is arrogant and dismissive of them to appear stunned by the way they are viewed. It's like wearing a hooded parker and gloves in summer and feigning surprise when others find it peculiar. I am offended by those who complain they are not permitted religious freedom while at the same time trying to limit the freedoms of those from other faiths or no faith. I am not in favor of banning religious symbols but I am in favor of limitations - for ALL religious symbolism. I agree with what Sir GH said in his last post: "I'm not immune to changing my stance on any particular subject, but I'm still not convinced in this case." |
| Mr.Jingles 01.02.2010 20:28 |
More Cowbell wrote: Ban religion as a whole. It's all total bollocks. Believing in some so called deity who may or may not exist & then worshipping them for a lifetime? I have better things to do with my life thanks very much. I may be proven wrong, but I'm gonna have a blast before I shuffle off this mortal coil. Religion is & always has been the biggest cause of arguements, war & death in the history of the World. Get born, live life to the full, die. Why believe in something only to be proven after death? Banning religion is one step closer to totalitarianism, and it restricts the very basic rights of people as individuals. Shoving any kinds of beliefs down people's throats is just plain wrong, and it doesn't make it any less extremist than the most fundamentalist of religious regimes. Stalin did everything in his power to ban religion, and I want to hear someone tell me how good did that go. Truth is that religion is NOT the root of all problems as many would believe. Intolerance is. |
| Yara 01.02.2010 22:56 |
I could play the childish game of attributing claims that people never made or saying that they’re arrogant for a thousand of reasons: anyone is vulnerable to this kind of charge, of course, and the reduction of the opponent’s arguments to absurd and ridicule is just a way of avoiding the rational, very circumscribed debate about to what extent the State should be allowed to interfere with people’s identities, religious or not. To what extent the way a person is dressed should influence her legal status: I don’t get “stunned”, as it’s been suggested, by the fact that, well, many people think I’m weird; not at all. I get sad, and find a bit of a nuisance, that some people start to think that just because I dress differently they have the right to heap abuse on me; mistreat me in stores or other public spaces where I should be accorded the same rights as any other person; bully, push or hit me. All these things have happened to me in Europe, and, to a lesser degree, in my country as well. Without understanding that the secular State, as it has been developed in modern industrial societies, is not an ATHEIST State – that’d be, for instance, Soviet Union under Stalin, perhaps -, but only a kind of power arrangement designed to ensure that people of all kinds of religious and non-religious convictions can live in peace, it’s very hard to make any advances in the debate. Every ideology divides people. But there’s something interesting here in the way that religion is singled out: Martin Luther King was not an atheist. A good deal of the power of his message came from his religion – and here you have a social movement, largely based on a certain Christian tradition, which ended up imploding an ideology which prevented blacks from enjoying the same rights and freedoms as whites. Much of this ideology was based on what was regarded as science: Social Darwinism and other pseudo-scientific rubbish. I’m not condemning science; it’s what I do for a living. Nor am I here to deny the gruesome acts done in the name of God. It goes without saying that the history of the Black movements in the United States is closely connected with that of the Jewish community. The 20th Century witnessed enough enlightened violence against religious and non-religious people alike, in a probably unprecedented scale. That goes back in time. When Marquis de Pombal uprooted the Jesuits who were protecting the natives in South America in the 18th Century, he did that by the enlightenment book – he put Voltaire in action, so to speak. The result was dreadful both for the Natives and the Jesuits. The enlightenment brought about a lot of fundamental and important changes in society, but it promoted the very misguided notion of “history as progress”. Calling me arrogant for wearing a certain kind of cloth and refusing to be denied the same rights as other people is beyond the point. Denying me the right – as Sarkozy’s and other leaders’ speeches suggest - of reacting to what I see as sexism, gross injustice and rudeness in my own way is profoundly arrogant, if for no other reason because it takes as an assumption that, whenever I happen to feel uncomfortable in a situation, I must either endure it or protest in ways that have to be in agreement with one’s own worldview! I’m not entitled to express my own personality and identity in a peaceful way, but by dint of some magical property, I’m the one who’s being arrogant! : -)) There are other issues at hand as well, but that’d take far too much time and space to debate: the way States have been identified with “society” and “nation” again, despite, or as a result of, the globalization process. That’d be one, and it is in the heart of this debate. I’m not debating my emotional bonds with people, or eventually, in some cases, the lack thereof; I’m debating public policy and public statements made by public figures. I’m not “stunned” for being regarded as different; I’m outraged for being regarded as a kind of savage by public figures who should be out there promoting equality, and not prejudice against certain kinds of perfectly peaceful religious manifestations. I said it in capitals: I don’t demand people to love me nor I expect them to. If it happens, well, it’s thrilling; if it doesn’t, life goes on. What I DO demand is that I’m accorded the very same rights of people who also make their statements in the public sphere by wearing other kinds of cloths and resorting to other kinds of discourses, which, interestingly enough, are regarded as neutral, when they’re anything but that. Again, I never advocated the suppression of other people’s rights. On the contrary: my religion, quite differently from many secular ideologies, is based on the sacred principle that each person is entitled to her personality and history, and that this is not negotiable. As I said, I find it COOL, very nice really, that young people who wear piercings and have tattoos all over their bodies work in the same department as me in a peaceful, joyful way. But I came to understand that these young people, often called immature or whatever because they refuse to succumb to whatever the pattern is thought to be, are much wiser than your average sober adult middle-class guy fraught with unconsidered prejudices and fearful of any kind of difference, even while they themselves are the ones pressing their boots on other people’s faces by invading and bombing other countries to supposedly bring them democracy or freedom. As of now, and it’s been so for at least 100 years, if not ever since Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt, is the West which is denying the rights of either Muslims, Jews or Middle Eastern peoples in general. Not the contrary. And yes, I know that Egypt is in Africa. ; -)) |
| The Real Wizard 02.02.2010 00:09 |
Mr.Jingles wrote: Truth is that religion is NOT the root of all problems as many would believe. Intolerance is.Bang on. If we didn't have religion, we'd have some other way to keep a large portion of the population ignorant, immune to growth, and unable to live peacefully with those who disagree with them on philosophical matters. Yara wrote: What I DO demand is that I’m accorded the very same rights of people who also make their statements in the public sphere by wearing other kinds of cloths and resorting to other kinds of discourses As a human being I wish you well, but this will probably never happen. As long as society slowly continues to secularize, the average civilized person will never find it acceptable not to see the faces of their fellow citizens. I'd like to think the few of us here at the forum represent the generally more tolerant folk in our society. Now consider the average folk, religious or otherwise and if they'd even give the issue the time of day. Hijabs, veils, burqas... they don't stand a chance. |
| Yara 02.02.2010 07:55 |
Sir GH wrote: As a human being I wish you well[...] I wish you well too. [handing out a vase with the finest selection of flowers available in the market] May we shake hands, Sir? [reaching out my hand] Don't let me here standing like a statue! |
| magicalfreddiemercury 02.02.2010 08:32 |
Yara, your last post on page three of this discussion sounds like a response to my last post. If it's not, forgive me. If it is, let me say that post was not directed to you. And if you read my post - any of my posts - you'll see my frustration and label of 'arrogance' has less to do with the wearing of religious symbols and more to do with the surprise some of those wearing them seem to feel when looked at or treated differently. I have never - nor will I ever - condone or encourage discrimination or poor treatment against someone because of the way they look, dress or worship. But I am not a fool and so I accept that certain people - religious or not - will stand out from the rest, sometimes making it difficult for others to carry on as usual - as in my example from a previous post. The very fact that religion has been the basis for conflict over the centuries should prepare those of any faith who are ultra orthodox for the uncomfortable way others feel around them. It should not, however, allow for the mistreatment of those people simply for the way they dress or worship. EDIT - And Yara, I have to say if my posts insulted you, that was not my intention and I'm sorry. My only intention here was to be honest about my views - and to hear the views of others - on what I feel is a vital issue in today's world. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 02.02.2010 08:34 |
Sir GH wrote:Mr.Jingles wrote: Truth is that religion is NOT the root of all problems as many would believe. Intolerance is.Bang on. If we didn't have religion, we'd have some other way to keep a large portion of the population ignorant, immune to growth, and unable to live peacefully with those who disagree with them on philosophical matters . But we do have religion and the disturbing part of it is that 'religion' by nature should be peaceful and loving while instead it has proven to be threatening and deadly. I know, everything in the extreme is bad and not every religion or religious person behaves in the extreme. I understand that and do not begrudge anyone their faith. I only complain when one person's faith is permitted to overshadow another person's faith or lack thereof. Religion - intolerant religion - is the root and it's a pervasive one at that, wedging itself into discussions about abortion rights, science class in public schools, funding for medical research and other personal freedoms of choice like wardrobe, diet and life-partner - as if those whose religious beliefs forbid these things should overshadow the non-religious, or varied religious beliefs of others. When you break it down, the majority of issues are indeed due to the religious waging battles against the freedoms of others, not the other way around. So while we agree - and we do agree - that 'intolerance' is the issue, we seem to disagree on the side from which the intolerance comes. |
| Yara 02.02.2010 09:12 |
Magicalfreddiemercury: Here's a vase of flowers for you too. The finest selection available... : )) Now I have only one more left. I'll give it to...Mr. Jingles, cause I like his avatar. [handing out the gifts] I feel like shaking hands today. [reaching out my hand] I'll stand here with my arms raised. ****** Note*: I totally agree on these other issues. No religion in science classes, and so on. Allowing people to have their religion and not be discriminated against is one thing; state-sponsorship of religious beliefs or tenets is a very different one, and I don't like the idea of professors teaching religion in science classes in private schools either. There's a lot of intolerance coming from the religious field. That's a fact, and I'd never deny it. |