Daily Mail Has gone too far (again)

[DailyMailIsRacist]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3125530/The-breeding-ground-jihadis-ice-cream-lady-wears-burka-great-textile-town-Dewsbury-undergone-terrible-transformation.html

Why is a women in a burka selling ice cream terrifying to them.

The message the niqab and burka gives to me is that these women are saying they dont want to communicate with me, this will hardly lead to an integration of communities so many of you wish for.

But why? The niqab doesn't deprive anyone of the powers of speech or hearing. The message it conveys to me is that the person wearing it is doing so as a result of their religious beliefs; there is simply no logical reason why anyone should conclude from the mere existence of a niqab that the wearer doesn't want to communicate. I don't subscribe to those beliefs, and I think it is wrong that some women really believe that they need to cover themselves in public, or have been forced to do so; nevertheless I really cannot see why anyone would regard it as in some way hostile.

The burka/niqab are symbols of female oppression that have no place in Britain yet people dictating to women what they can and can't wear is hunky dory

what about women's right to choose for themselves?

Icimoi ha ha strangely enough I do use the phone and email. That has nothing to do with face to face communication.

Also,wedding veils are normally see through and in all the weddings that I have been to the veil is only in place when the bride walks down the aisle. As for nuns, I have not seen one with a full face covering like the niqab only ones like the burka. As stated previously, I have no problem with head covers - just face covers.

If we feel uncomfortable around something because it is alien to our experiences we should try to overcome this.

Not liking face covers is so shockingly egocentric.

Fine, you don't like them - so what? No one is asking you to wear one.

You don't get to have an opinion on what anyone else wears.

I disagree. It is registered as aggressive in out brain. It is a biological reaction.

Where's your proof for that rather outlandish statement?

karbon that is bollocks!! aggression is often apparent in a grimace , which of course you can't see if someone's mouth is hidden.

how much difference is there between a burkah and a nun's habit?

Well with a burkha I think there's quite a different because the face is covered.

With a chador or headscarf I would say none.

"You don't get to have an opinion on what anyone else wears."

Erm, Youre wrong.

I don't like face coverings, I'm entitled to have that opinion.

When men start wearing them I might change my mind.

I've met a lot of women who are happy to wear it, I don't find it remotely threatening or intimidating.

It's not something I know a lot of the ins and outs of though, so until I have reason to gen up a bit more I think the safest course is to adopt a live and let live attitude. Essentially, it's not my fight.

I hate what it stands for. The niqab isn't a ancient traditional dress, it's fairly new. In some Muslim countries its illigal not to wear one and could result in death.

Why don't the men wear one?

I don't understand women on MN being blaize about it. Does that mean posters agree with small school children being dressed in a death shroud to? It's not even in the Q'uran, it's a man made tactic to hide 'their' women and daughters away.

If you seen a woman doing the school run with a paper bag over head with eye holes cut out because her husband didn't want other men to look at her people would be clambering over themselves to get her the women's aid number.

But it's religion do I suppose it doesn't matter.

ha ha strangely enough I do use the phone and email. That has nothing to do with face to face communication.

Clearly it does, crikeylou. You said that you like to see people's faces and facial expressions when you interact with them. If you use the phone you can manage without when it suits you.

If you think the niqab should be banned in state / public places, I assume you feel the same about a cross or a star of David?

If they covered the wearers face, I would. As they don't, I don't.
Bad analogy.

Fanjo no it is not because it is alien to our experiences. The niqab is quite a controversial piece of clothing even in the Muslim world. I have heard lots of negative remarks from Muslims about it. I have even seen a woman in a niqab asked to leave a swimming pool where she was watching her kids swim in a private club in a Muslim country. The security staff said it was making the (mainly Muslim) members feel uncomfortable. I did feel sorry for her although I thought it was ridiculous to take young children swimming when you clearly would struggle to help them if they got into difficulty.

Many women are not given a choice, the ones that do are seen more religious which piles on the pressure for the women that don't want to. This was imposed by misogonistic men. The more we become accepting to niqabs the more it will be seen as normal and main stream. Covering a woman's or a child's face should never be seen as normal or main stream and it shocks me when posters support it when they are so usually staunch on WR. The niqab has nothing to do with religion. It was a blokes doing.

How would posters feel if there nursery children were being taught by women in niqabs? Would they be scared? Would they be able to see a kindly expression? Would they feel they could go hug her?

It is alien. It has no place in this day and age. I worry for the children being forced to wear them even on the way to school.

"A lot of people here must really struggle with phone and email conversations"

Please don't make idiotic comments.

There is a difference between not being able to see someone's face vs someone HIDING their face from you. The latter feels intimidating and could potentially be a security issue. It could be anyone under there.

Also: If you have mild hearing problems, like I do, then email is obviously fine and phone convos are usually fine too (lack of background noise, received held close to your face). It's different when you are trying to talk to someone on a street with background noise. The muffling effect of a cloth barrier and the inability to lip read create significant barriers.

People wear facial masks sometimes in Japan where I live; I HATE this because it causes communication problems for me (but at least mask wearers will usually push their masks down to speak if you ask them to).

In societies where facial veiling is the norm, women spend relatively little time in public, mixed-sex environments, and tend to spend most of their time among family members and/or female-only environment. Men tend to avoid speaking to veiled women. So communication issues tend not to arise very much.

In the UK, the relative lack of women-only spaces means that women have to spend a lot of time in public areas where men are present, and economic pressures mean that many have to work outside the home; this means that if a woman chooses to veil her face, she's frequently going to wearing that veil in situations where she is expected to communicate with people including strangers.

It's a recipe for problems and tensions.

If a woman is wearing a veil and I think it's wrong because she is oppressed, that is very different to finding the veil offensive to me personally because I prefer to see faces, which I think is intolerant and egocentric.

To the person who thinks it means you don't care about women's rights if you support their right to wear what they want.

As always I see an age gap in the interpretations on here. Younger posters tend to see it as the wearer's right to wear religious, modest dress and older posters remember the time before 1979 when women in many Muslim countries were fully westernised.

I am 55 so it bothers me and seems retrogressive especially in Europe where there is no obligation to cover. I thought it was male oppression originally but from what, y'now, actual Muslims say, it seems to be more political. I am with the French on this. (Still haven't read the article).