Danish ban on the burqa comes into effect today

I was more puzzled by government regulations targeting women who wear a particular garment.
Laws against masking make perfect sense to me. Laws against a targeted segment of the population like this one seems to be is bad law.

... but i see I am talking about feelings and not ideology
I may be accused of 'whataboutery'. That's probably valid. But I don't think blanket bans on women's clothing is the way to challenge sexism within a culture

Donkey

That's not my experience, but I see that it is yours. Niqab wearers I speak to have a variety of communication styles and some are more outgoing than others. Like you I 'disapprove' of the fact that it's women whose public face is so constrained but I am interested in the individuals I meet. Some of them I worry about. Of course I do. As much as other women I meet who do not cover their face and seem cowed by their husbands.

I felt yesterday that I was being berated for not feeling something I do not feel.

The reason I brought up the Jewish community, whom I meet very regularly too, is that even though they do not cover their faces, culturally they have no interest in communication with those outside. They are very "antisocial" (though individually it does vary to some extent), and that is their choice. They are not living their lives to please me. Moreover, women are not allowed to speak to or look at men and vice versa. I find this as unsettling as others clearly do about the face veil.

To be honest, I think the wearing of the niqab may die out in Western Europe over the next few years. Not because of bans, but because it has become synonymous with the uniform of female Daesh units in Syria.

Who the hell wants to dress like a bunch of murderous harpies that terrorise Syrian woman and children and whose husbands burn Jordanian pilots alive?

Already I'm seeing far fewer niqabs in our region than I did four years ago, and I suspect this is why. No one can support the actions of Daesh. The rage against them in the Middle East is incendiary.

About the 'refusing to interact' thing. That barrier to interaction is actually being put up by the niqab wearer.

I was in a small university tutorial with a niqab-wearing woman some years ago. It was about eight people in the room sat in a circle, seven of whom could see and speak to each other normally, and one faceless person shrouded in black. Everyone was uncomfortable with this - EVERYONE, except, probably the niqab wearer herself. You could feel the awkwardness in the room, especially when the tutor tried to involve her in discussions (she never spoke voluntarily).

I was a good liberal who tried to pretend I was open minded and this was all fine, but pretty soon I realised it wasn't. It was not fine, it was weird, it affected the whole dynamic of the class that one person kept their face hidden behind a veil the whole time. And this was not about OUR prejudices. This was on her. She chose to put up that barrier (literally!) between us.

I know posters will say, you should have tried talking to her, you don't know her situation, she might have been a nice person etc. All true. I am in no way implying that women who cover their faces aren't full people with rich inner lives and agency. And agency is half the point, actually. Anyone who does this is deliberately making it harder for anyone to get to know them, they are deliberately wearing a inherently alienating piece of clothing that is also sending a clear political message about women's bodies, and I'm pissed off about the gaslighting that suggests the other party is to blame if they feel uncomfortable about this.

I mean, if I tried to have conversation with you while hiding my face behind my hands and peeking out between my fingers, it's not your fault if the conversation feels awkward and you find me hard to relate to. I am the one who is making communication between us difficult.

It's not just you who are creeped out with it donkey I am too. A law preventing face covering in public (except for reasons of safety) would get my support. I think genitals covered / face on show are reasonable constraints on the freedom of the individual even in a liberal society.

I'd be firmly against people wearing masks in public anyway and for that reason alone the full covering should be illegal.
It is also oppressive and if preventing women from carrying their prison with them when they go out means that they are kept in a prison at home that's a reason to sort out that prison too.

I was the one who used creeped out. I knew it was strong language and I used it deliberately instead of something softer because I wanted to emphasise the importance of instinct; of physiological response. It is a human instinct to have a physiological response of alarm, danger (even if only registered subconsciously) when you encounter a stranger who is covering their face. Gavin DeBecker in The Gift of Fear talks about the instinctive, split-second assessments that we are doing whenever we meet a new person, and how much this depends on their face, especially the interplay between eyes and mouth (e.g., smiling mouth with non-smiling eyes is a combo that signals deception/danger). Most of us are unaware that we are doing this.

Anyhow, the reason I'm pointing this out has to do with my main reason for supporting a niqab/burqa ban, which is that it is fundamentally antisocial. It is antisocial to refuse to show your face to others, this is why I support the state intervening where this becomes a trend. I know that other posters have different reasons for objecting to it. It's sexist too, obviously, and women have every right to feel disturbed by implications of it in that respect as well.

Also, Lass

I am generally interested what you have to say though I don't share the "heat" of emotion about it, and want to to tell you that I have no interest in twisting words. Thats not me.

Lass

The creeped out comment was to Donkey, as she said it just above my post

The bit about not being able to communicate and not being able to see a smile was to you

I have no intention of putting words in your mouth and I am sorry if my lazy lack of bolding who exactly I was talking to has led to that.

I do not see the point of banning the miqab or burka except in certain situation as Maisy said. Nor do I see any advantage in refusing to interact with people around me.

I'm on the fence as well. I know from experience that communicating with somebody wearing a niqab can be tricky, especially in a loud place or if they have an accent — I struggle enough with some accents when I can see their lips moving! And it is a lot harder to read cues when both the face and the body are covered.

On the other hand it's taking a choice away.

I'm not sure that it's really comparable to nuns — the ones around here wear skirts and cardis most of the time, although obviously they wear a wimple. The habit is more like a "dress uniform" I suppose. And their faces aren't covered of course.

They are just themselves, and as worthwhile getting to know and communicate with and laugh with as anyone else

Really? If they were say hardline Ulster Protestants opposed to abortion or same sex marriage I should make the effort to get to know them?

I find the concept that a woman's face cannot be seen in public deeply offensive. I have nothing in common with any woman who thinks that it is acceptable.

TransplantsArePlants

Ok. I see you want to only talk about faces and I have attempted to show that it's possible to interact without being creeped out and still being able to communicate

If that post is directed to me do not put words in my mouth or twist what I said. I said nothing about creepy, creeped out.

Donkey

“The reason we feel instinctively creeped out when we see a faceless person (whether they are wearing a burqa or a balaclava) is because the face is so basic and fundamental to human social interaction and risk assessment.”

Yes but there is also more to it. I feel creeped out when I see an outward expression of shame in one’s appearance, that a woman’s face must be hidden from view, that it’s public showing is offensive or sexual. This flies in the face of all my values and the values of our own culture where women were oppressed some time ago but now have many freedoms.

Just to prove you're not wildly unpopular well said hearmyvoice. There are many perspectives to this, I'm not sure they've all been explored.

Lass - in my work I come into contact with many women who wear the niqab. I just don't see it after first introductions - anymore than any other item of clothing or piercings or blue hair or whatever . They are just themselves, and as worthwhile getting to know and communicate with and laugh with as anyone else.

Er, no actually I don't. I think I've covered all the bases I wanted to cover. If you pardon the pun. If you read all my answers. And the answers which I've agreed with; like Maisy's.

Off now. Respectfully, I am not in the mood for a heated debate just at the moment

HollowTalk - re "I really wish it could be banned, but it would just create more problems overnight. This is exactly what happened in France and female students were immediately pulled out of school and not allowed out of the house. Before, they could get an education; now they can't."

Who are these girls? Can you point me in the direction of these stories?

Transplants, you keep changing the subject back to religious clothing in general, when the point has been repeatedly made that it's about face covering specifically.

Ok. I see you want to only talk about faces and I have attempted to show that it's possible to interact without being creeped out and still being able to communicate.

Are there any Jewish sects which require faces to be covered up?

And if you are offended by that I don't know why you aren't more offended by ultra orthodox Jews, who have no interest in interacting with the wider community and who also cover up in ways which are impractical and restrictive.

It really doesn't creep everyone out. I do understand a rejection of what you assume it represents on a societal level.
But you can't assume what it means to that individual. I am quite prepared to have friendly interactions with people with whom I disagree as long as they aren't foisting it on me. I think it's interesting that she has chosen that - her own mother doesn't wear the niqab; nor does her grandmother. Maybe one day I'll get beyond pleasantries and ask her how it came about.

Where is the limit to any government dictating women's garb? Is it just burqua?

The government already sets limits on how people are permitted to present in public - that's why you're not allowed to stroll around the streets naked.

WRT to other dress, I think the limit should be burqa/other face coverings, yes. This isn't about wanting to restrict religious freedom or freedom of expression. It's based on the same principle that says it's not OK to get about in public with your genitals out - covering one's face violates social norms, can present a security risk, and creeps everyone else out, to put it bluntly. That isn't because of prejudice against Muslims. It's because of deeply rooted evolved instincts around how we recognise, assess and relate to one another as human animals.

The reason we feel instinctively creeped out when we see a faceless person (whether they are wearing a burqa or a balaclava) is because the face is so basic and fundamental to human social interaction and risk assessment.