to not send my girls on this school trip because of my beliefs

[JustGiveMeTwoMinutes]

The trip is to a mosque and the girls (year 3 and 4) have to cover their heads with a scarf, the boys don't have to.

Just to be clear about where I am coming from, this is about a specific practice which I believe is discriminatory and therefore disagree with. I would not choose myself to enter a building that I could only enter if I wore particular clothes but where that requirement was limited to one gender or one group defined by arbitrary characteristics. I would be happy to cover my head as a sign of respect/tradition if everyone entering the building was required to do so.

They can make their own decision on this when they are adults.

Am I being ridiculous and petty or is it reasonable to stand up for my view that just because a custom is part of a religion that does not excuse it being discriminatory?

The thing is, will the OP's daughters learn more about sexism within a religion, and want to challenge it more by:

1. Not engaging in this visit because only girls MAY have to wear headscarves (did we ever hear back from the OP as to whether that is a direct instruction from the mosque, or whether it is a non-muslim teacher interpreting what the mosque MIGHT want?)

[Quotation from a typical mosque website about school visits: "Young children under the age of 12 are not considered to be adults and may dress as they do in school unless they wish to adopt any part of Muslim attire for the day (hats/scarves) to enliven their visit." - in other words, no more compulsory than e.g. schools visiting a Victorian museum dressing in Victorian clothes]

or

1. Taking part in the visit, wearing headscarves IF required, and 'walking a mile in someone else's shoes' to really experience the sexism involved.

I know what my DD would learn more from - I have taken her and DS on 'pre-visits' to different places of worship when I was planning class visits for my school, and dress codes / rules / differences between men and women formed the basis for a VERY live debate afterwards. Importantly, SHE minded, rather than me telling her that she SHOULD mind - and thus the learning has stayed with her.

Thanks Melvali, I would defend any woman's right to cover just as I would to not cover if that is their own choice.

So would I. That doesn't mean I am not bewildered or disappointed by an educated British woman brought up by a moderate Muslim woman arriving at a choice that represents and perpetuates the oppression of millions of women less lucky than her, and with fewer choices.

"As girls don't receive a lower standard of education at all girl's schools than boys at all boy's schools how is it discriminatory?"

You could argue - I'm not sure that I would, but you could - that women do not receive a lower standard of religious experience through covering their hair in a religious building, nor do they receive a lower standard of religious experience in a service by sitting in a slightly different part of the building - but both of the latter have been described as sexist in this thread.

The reasons BEHIND single sex schools - distraction from the opposite sex, lower performance in certain subjects if opposite gender is present, traditionally different curricula (I know that the local girls' grammar school, for example, teaches textiles and dance to GCSE, whereas the boy's one does not) again COULD be regarded as sexist?

(Locally, there are 6x more single sex grammars than mixed ones - the choice is not always there... or at least has to be traded off against grammar xs non-grammar - so if you choose a grammar education as the best educational option for your child, you do not necessarily have the choice of a mixed school)

You could argue - I'm not sure that I would, but you could - that women do not receive a lower standard of religious experience through covering their hair in a religious building, nor do they receive a lower standard of religious experience in a service by sitting in a slightly different part of the building - but both of the latter have been described as sexist in this thread.

I'm not arguing that they do receive a lower standard of religious experience. They certainly receive a lower standard a comfort though particularly in hotter countries.

The reasons BEHIND single sex schools - distraction from the opposite sex, lower performance in certain subjects if opposite gender is present, traditionally different curricula (I know that the local girls' grammar school, for example, teaches textiles and dance to GCSE, whereas the boy's one does not) again COULD be regarded as sexist?

It depends on why textiles or dance are not offered though. If it is because there is not enough demand for the subject then the school is not being sexist by not teaching it.

(Locally, there are 6x more single sex grammars than mixed ones - the choice is not always there... or at least has to be traded off against grammar xs non-grammar - so if you choose a grammar education as the best educational option for your child, you do not necessarily have the choice of a mixed school)

Mixed grammars do exist though. You can also obviously send them to a mixed comprehensive.

I challenge anyone to explain why life for women would be nicer in an Islamic or fundamentalist Christian / Catholic country.

I'm very surprised that a PP said she would be happy to live in an Islamic country. I'd hazard a guess she'd change her mind if she lived out there and had been raped and was facing imprisonment.

Importantly, SHE minded, rather than me telling her that she SHOULD mind - and thus the learning has stayed with her.

So you think if you need to wear a headscarf to understand the sexism involved. Not too sure of your logic there

Hmmm

I took my beaver scouts to a synagogue and all the boys were asked to wear skull caps (is that what they are called?) and no parents complained. In fact the boys thought it was brilliant because it was something different.

I have two daughters and i wouldn't have an issue with them covering their hair to visit a mosque. I don't agree with alot of the beliefs of the religion, or any religion really, but its a good talking point with them and also it helps them understand

Just butting in one last time - a) I frequently visit 'Islamic' states so know exactly what it's like and b) just because an 'islamic' state is doing something, ie putting a raped female into prison, it doesn't necessarily mean that that's what the religion has prescribed. It doesn't say that anywhere in Islam.

Leavemuwingsbehind me - I'm very disappointed to hear that you are disappointed in me! Talk about narrow mindedness.

So can you name any 'Islamic states' where they have the same sort of laws and freedoms for women as they have in Europe then?

Turkey, actually. I'm prety sure Turkey is about as good as it gets on that front, but then it is a secular state with an Islamic majority, not an Islamic state.

I'm saying that everything these 'Islamic' states do are not necessary compliant with shariah law. It's all politics at the end of the day. The world and media are totally controlled and not by religion!!

"So you think if you need to wear a headscarf to understand the sexism involved."

What i mean is that young children tend to understand / appreciate something much more if they themselves have EXPERIENCED it, rather than being TOLD it. So if the OP TELLS her child 'you can't visit the mosque because you will be asked to wear a headscarf, and that is sexist', then the child's learning of that lesson will be less deep than if they visit the mosque, are asked to wear a headscarf, see how women/ men are treated differently, and then come up with all the 'Why?' questions for themselves.

At 7, I imagine that they won't feel they are experiencing sexism by wearing a headscarf - they will simply take it as an OK thing to do because the school and the mosque (ie the authority figures) have said they have to wear one. It takes parents to say that, in the absence of a debate by both of those figures, no you are not going - and here are the reasons why.

Sir,

The way it went for us was - DD and I were asked to cover our hair. We did. DS did not.

As soon as we were outside, DD -always quick to see unfairness - was all 'Mummy, WHY doesn't DS have to wear a headscarf? That's not FAIR! And did you see there were separate bits for men and women? Why was that?'

Why should the parental input be to prevent the child having that - for DD very powerful - experience? Why couldn't the parent lead the discussion afterwards, when it would be really meaningful?

(DD was much younger than 7 - think she was probably 5 at that point)

What i mean is that young children tend to understand / appreciate something much more if they themselves have EXPERIENCED it, rather than being TOLD it. So if the OP TELLS her child 'you can't visit the mosque because you will be asked to wear a headscarf, and that is sexist', then the child's learning of that lesson will be less deep than if they visit the mosque, are asked to wear a headscarf, see how women/ men are treated differently, and then come up with all the 'Why?' questions for themselves.

It could quite easily go the other way though. My children would have thought the headscarves were okay at that age if I and the teachers had said they should wear them. They would have been far more likely to learn that it was not okay if I said so.

I would approach it from the other angle and explain why I wasn't going to let it happen teacher - I don't acquiesce to something I don't believe in and then have the discussion, I take a stand and I raise my children to do the same.

Why should the parental input be to prevent the child having that - for DD very powerful - experience? Why couldn't the parent lead the discussion afterwards, when it would be really meaningful?

Whether or not you had a discussion about it afterwards, I still think that telling them to wear a scarf so that they could go to the mosque suggests that you don't really disapprove of it. Children will be influenced by that.

Believe you me, DD would take a MUCH stronger stand because she understood and had experienced something for herself - she's far too independent-minded to take my word for it (or any other person-in-authority's, frankly).

Does a child learn more about 'taking a stand' and being independent-minded from being exposed to things and making their own minds up, or by being told what to think? I have done my best to ensure that my children think for themselves, and are given opportunities to test that skill, as the obvious first level of defence against all forms of bigotry and herd instinct.

"telling them to wear a scarf so that they could go to the mosque suggests that you don't really disapprove of it"

I don't approve of children going down the mines, or other Victorian child labour practices - but I am entirely happy for my children to dress up as Victorians and experience even a little of those things at museums as part of shaping their own values and views of the world.

If they simply get the boys to wear headscarves for the visit too, everyone will be happy.

(Bartholins, I suspect if the OP calls the mosque directly, she will find that no children under 12 have to wear headscarves - and then everyone will be happy too!)