AIBU to think face coverings in public should be banned?

I think the French have got it right in regards to religious facial coverings.
Ditto balaclavas and masks outwith an appropriate setting.
I'd be happy to see them banned.

When it was just a few women… it was a bit of an oddity but live and let live. But the rapid increase of full covering does feel uncomfortable.

I have posted this before, but there was a child in dd’s class who started wearing a full covering (not just headscarf) in yr 5. Face covered and long dress including thick sort of leggings as well. Obviously excused from PE etc. Her dm wore a kind of leather mask with mesh over the eyes. Sorry not sorry but that was creepy. Imagine getting decked out in that before the school run.

Hilarious that you've equated living in Scotland with living so remotely that the PP doesn't know what an urban area is like 😂

In this densely populated Scottish city where I live, I don't feel compelled to be available to "make connections" with anyone who feels entitled to do so. I also feel very entitled to pull my scarf up over my face to keep warm, because why should I be cold just to facilitate your comfort?

Perhaps we should mandate a maximum fringe length in order that faces not be obscured beyond the level you deem appropriate? Or set parameters around the wearing of sunglasses (small ones, obviously, lest they make connections difficult) only when the cloud cover is reduced to a prescribed lever?

I can't tell you why all these women chose to wear it because I haven't talk to all these women to ask them, have you?

We don't live in a society that needs identification at all times. When was the last time you had to prove your identy to walk into tescos or take your kids to soft play?

Do you really want a society where the goverment control how women dress? Does that really sound less oppressive to women?

How about we let women chose their own style choices and support laws that prosecute coercive control to protect all women from men who think they should have control over our every day decisions

We already have laws that stop women being forced to veil against their wishes! Coercive control falls under domestic abuse laws. Why take the choice away from all when the law already protects women who may be coerced into it.
That's like saying some women are coerced into having more children so from now it's illegal to have children.
It's ludicrous to suggest their free will to dress how they want to should be taken from them because some times men might influence their decisions.
Why do you believe the goverment has more rights to dictate a woman's clothing choices than the woman herself?

I’ve suffered the consequence of not covering my face in very cold weather. It wasn’t pretty. People kept asking if I’d fallen over and hit my chin because I had an open sore there. This was probably colder than anywhere in the UK (-20 in Banff) but the point stands that’s it’s not great for your skin.

Several people have now mentioned hijabs whilst arguing about niqabs.

Are we banning those too? Because those aren't face coverings...

You completely ignore my concerns about disabled people being excluded because of your views on religious dress.

Banning face coverings won't stop people using them to conceal their identity. If someone is willing to be violent and/or steal they will also be willing to ignore a ban on face coverings. So you will have excluded disabled people, and criminals will not be deterred.

If the police respond to an incident in good time they can detain people on the spot. It's only because this is no longer expected, but the public, by criminals, and by the police, that there is all this handwringing about being able to identify criminals on CCTV. If I were running a shop I would want the police to attend and arrest thieves/vandals - not try and track them down later on CCTV...

How will you fund the benefit bill for those of us currently in the work place but who will not be able to get there or participate safely if we are unable to wear a mask on the bus? There is a (not unreasonable, in my view) effort to improve disabled people's access to the work place to try and reduce the benefit bill, and making it harder for a not insubstantial number of people to go to work is really not going to help with this. And those determined to ignore any ban will do so regardless.

(FWIW I am no fan of covering the face for religious reasons, and I worry about women being coerced to do so. But forcing women to disrobe is just as coercive as forcing them to cover up.)

it is incredibly naive to believe that all women who chose to vail their faces are doing so because they are forced into it.

It is incredibly naive to believe that all women who choose to veil their faces do so without being forced into it.

Which scenario do you think is most likely, on probability?

a) women experiencing social pressure, conditioning from birth (their mother may be veiled for eg and some (only female) children get put in a hijab), coercion and even threats from misogynist men who have created a set of rules that says that if you don’t veil you are immodest and immodest women can be raped or abused (as illustrated by national advertising schemes in some countries)
or

b) a woman freely chooses to inconvenience and isolate herself by wearing a totally impractical face covering that compromises her vision and comfort (not to mention is REALLY difficult to eat in public while wearing - have you seen the videos?)

Ask yourself why it’s only the women and girls who are restricted and expected to hide themselves away.

Where does this end? In Afghanistan the men have decreed that women are now only allowed vision out of one eye when in public. Look it up.

People who commit those crimes will simply continue to commit them, with or without face coverings.

This is a commonly used type of claim to justify various things but utterly wrong imo.

They won’t continue to commit crimes if they get caught and put in prison because the witnesses identified them by their faces. I’m amazed you can’t deduce that.

More effective policing and harsher punishments are the solution.

How can you have effective policing if you can’t identify the criminals? Who do you punish?

Religious face coverings are not in line with Western values, we have tolerated them so far as they have been tiny in number but as that number grows, we need to take a firmer stance and look at the human rights issues they cause. Enabling women currently being coerced into wearing face coverings by giving them legal backing should be a good thing.

But why have they chosen to wear a veil? Wearing a cross does not impact on anyone else any preventing full communication/identification for security.

I’m sorry, but what we are talking about is something different, it’s about general interactions not someone you know well. I could be blind folded and still recognise my friends and know their reactions, a stranger or work colleague less so. It’s about general societal interactions.

it’s as culturally inappropriate in the UK as it would be to wear a crop top and daisy dukes in Afghanistan

I always thought this until I met a lady who wore a niqab, she was captain of a rounders team I played against and was the most vocal, energetic and hilarious person on the field. We now see each other often and I soon realised, the only barrier her niqab caused was within me not her. I have since seen out and about in other settings such as the supermarket, I am able to recognise her by her eyes, walk and style. Ashamedly I never thought that would be possible as was in the camp of everybody looks the same wearing a niqab 😬

Nobody here is arguing that face covering should be mandatory for women - in fact we already have laws in place that prosecute those who try to control how their partners dress. Coercive control is already illegal here.
it is incredibly naive to believe that all women who chose to vail their faces are doing so because they are forced into it.
Many women who chose to vail their faces do so because they have chosen to. And wether that choice is formed from religion or something else, it is still choice these women are entitled to make.
I think it's incredibly odd that some jewish women chose to shave off their own hair and replace it with a wig made from human hair. There is no logic to it. But I would never argue we should outlaw women shaving their head.
I also find it odd that Christians wear a cross, a literal sign of torturous murder, but again I would never think it should be outlawed.
I am shocked so many women here truly believe the goverment should be able to tell women how to dress in the name of freedom.

Another dog whistle racist post.

I’m sorry but I’d rather protect my own health than your need to communicate with me - a complete stranger.
I don’t want to communicate with anyone who would put their own want of a conversation above my health thanks.

YABU because people who are prepared to break the law by stealing are not going to stop wearing masks because that is against the law.

YABU because when it is very cold, covering your face with a scarf keeps you warm.

YABU because it is none of your business if a woman chooses to cover her face as part of her religion. You are not entitled to a "connection" with anyone.

YABU because it is not only immune compromised people that may want to protect themselves from infection. Maybe the members of their household do, to help keep them safe. Maybe they have a medical condition that means picking up an illness is more serious for them. Maybe they have been waiting a long time for surgery and don't want it cancelled. Maybe they have an upcoming holiday they don't want spoiled. Maybe they just don't want to get ill. None of that is any of your business.

I didn't realise that her dreadful family hid her injuries behind a hijab.

I think there’s certainly an argument to support what you say, however, I think it’s clear that some people only give a shit about this issue because it’s viewed as getting one over Muslims. Criminals have worn balaclavas and face coverings since time immemorial.

It’s like the number of card carrying carnivores who suddenly have a special interest in banning halal slaughter. Some will be genuine, a lot will just want to stick it to the Muslims, and don’t give two hoots about animal welfare.

Seriously?! And how are the public going to recognise those? And what’s to stop anyone who simply doesn’t fancy catching a cold this week buying one - so we are back to asking people to “prove” their exemption…

(Also highly unlikely to work on safety grounds. There are many shapes of masks to fit different faces - and what fits one person will not fit another etc. There will be too many needed variations to make this feasible.)

Making a group of people wear a label in order to access public life has really sinister undertones.

Please think about what you are suggesting, and think about how you would feel it were you or someone you love on the receiving end. As I have said already on this thread, I have been physically assaulted by a man angry I was wearing a mask on the bus. No one intervened when he started yelling at me, no one intervened when he struck me. I was simply on my way to work, sitting in silence, wearing a mask. The attitudes to disabled people on this thread are awful. (The Islamophobia is also horrid, but plenty of other posters are also calling that out.) If the concern really was about violence and antisocial behaviour the discussion would be about preventing that - not about how people can justify banning some members of society from participating in public life.

Maybe allow specified medical masks that are available by free prescription? Surely that’s. The obvious sensible option?

I am re-pasting my response to the OP re “medical reasons”:

“How will “medical exemptions” work?

As someone upthread asks, are we supposed to strip off to show our scars and bald heads before entering Tesco? Do we need to recite our lists of medications before getting on the bus? How will this be enforced? Are bus drivers qualified to do this? Will there be a panel of bus passengers deciding whether we can get on? How will privacy be assured, or do you propose that the public should have access to undressed disabled bodies, and/or our medical history, so everyone knows we have an “exemption”? Will you call the police to question masked cancer patients catching a bus to the hospital so they can prove their “exempt” status?

It’s ridiculous, and as I have already said it is clear discrimination. (Requiring a disabled person to disclose private information to access a service, and not requiring the same disclosure of a non disabled person, is the definition of discrimination.)”

I totally agree OP. Add food delivery cyclists with full black helmets and fully covered faces driving illegal “electric bikes” aka unlicensed and untaxed motorbikes to the mix…

Religious face coverings are a choice though! Most Muslims don’t use full face coverings in the west. To the vast majority of the western public they signify oppressive treatment of women and inequality with men. We need to ensure fuller integration with wider society. Hiding a woman’s face based on nothing but misogyny is a barrier to this which needs to be removed

Totally agree, unless there is a medical reason no face coverings should be allowed for all the reasons you mention.