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?

Most North African countries for example?bikinis at the beach and western clothing in the city.and I'm not talking about tourist resorts either.yes some countries have very unfair laws.but that the government not he religion.tired to see the two mixed up.you don't have to agree either,just come down your high horse where you are so much cleverer and are ready to defend the poor oppressed/uneducated/brainwashed Muslim women

whatthe
Most North African countries for example?bikinis at the beach and western clothing in the city.
Libya ?
Algeria ?
Egypt ?
Tunisia ?
show me a picture of local people in bikinis on a beach along the African Med coast not in a resort .....

Talkin
We went to a local holiday resort in Algeria where I was the only foreigner (a friend of DH knows the owner) and there were women in tiny bikinis by the pool. They were locals other women were wearing long skirts and headscarves even in the sea. It's a mixture. Where DH's family live it's conservative, in Algiers less so.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1874471.stm

^ astounding. Astounding.

Yes its lovely to read your posts again Mistress Mia.

I should I have also seen plenty of women on public beaches in a one piece swimsuit. There is little external tourism in Algeria so it is likely most of these women were Algerian.

Batshitlady and mummybear

There is no requirement for young children to cover their heads, so it is not normal or expected.

This isn't about showing a lack of respect or understanding.

I fail to see how a scarf on someone's head is affecting other people.many posters have said they wouldn't mind if the others beliefs were not affecting anyone else...but this doesn't work if it about something Muslims do?

The scarf on another woman's head makes a mockery of our western freedom, Whattheuh. It is a direct challenge to the concept of a secular society, the society governed by civil law that guarantees us our human and civil rights. In societies that are not ruled by western civil law, human and civil rights for women are not guaranteed. The head covering is Muslims taking the piss.

It is also a constant reminder that if we are not constantly vigilant then that will be us, behind the veil.

The veil is the thin end of the wedge. It always reflects an upswelling of Islamic fundamentalism, never too far removed from pressure for the recognition of Sharia law.

Your western freedom??how arrogant,the belief that only westners have freedom.not freedom for others to wear/believe what they like tho?it could be you behind the veil?not unless you wanted to wear one.and the hijab is not an expression of fundamentalism,just of someone trying to practice their religion.or are you one of those that consider a "moderate"Muslim as one that doesn't fast,pray,cover basically doesn't practice?and everyone else must be a fundamentalist.yeah,right...

the hijab is not an expression of fundamentalism
Why do men not cover their hair and arms and legs in case they "inflame " the women ?

Do you consider those who kill random innocents to be haram ?
If not, why not?

Fuck, my granny was a big fan of wearing scarfs on her head. I never realised that she was a threat to Western freedom.

the hijab is not an expression of fundamentalism

Well its not always a choice. I speak as someone with family who live somehwere where they can get arrested or at the very least harranged by some spotty youth in a uniform for not covering up.

So in my eyes, its a nonsense. A scrap of fabric neither makes you closer or further away from your deity of choice.

It's also very odd how the rules get stricter when the government are unpopular for some reason.

If the Hijab is not a sign of oppression, why did 100.000 Iranian women protest against its introduction in the 70's

remember that the Niqab was bedoin anomaly and hijabs a mecca rarity up till '79

prior to that in the 19th and 20th centuries, only Jewish women were forced to cover their hair

so the Muslims are wannabee Jews

I am not religious and and from a very strong female family.
I would never deprive my dc from seeing inside a mosque education wise due to the compromise of wearing a head scarf.
My DD is very aware of what Islam stands for as she has grown up with Moslem children and others with different religious beliefs.
The friendship group are simply that and very mixed so we are lucky, they discuss issues such as women's rights and my atheist DD respects what is said and questions when appropriate. It is equal. They question her. This is what civilised people do IMO.
Are the young women in Britain's towns and cities on weekend nights wearing short skirts in January without jackets, too drunk to find a taxi really free or just deluded? Why does British culture accept this and raise there children to it?
By calling people out on how they live their life without understanding why they live it that way is just antagonistic!!!

Yes,it's not a choice in Iran,we got that.how about generally?it is a choice for many many women.but it's dismissed because it's forced in Iran?talking,I see hijab as something a practicing Muslim woman usually wear.not something that fundamentalist wear.men are required to cover different areas of their body.you can agree with this or not,up to you.but wtf is your question about killing innocents?not worth an answer

Talkin
That killing innocents comment is really below the belt! It implies that hijab wearing = ISIS apologist.

It's like George W Bush's with us or against us rhetoric.

mmmcake

You raise some interesting points. At my international school, these discussions were very much a part of daily life. My Lebanese friends in particular were keen to enjoy the freedoms that western traditions gave them, especially cinema and clothes shopping. Is your dd's friendship group mixed sex? I found that the girls were always quieter when the groups were mixed.

I don't know about the British girls out without jackets as I don't drink, but that's a cultural issue, the right that Northern Europeans have to drink heavily. Men in the UK have done this for centuries. Surely the issue is anyone doing this, not women rather than men?

which bits of the body do men have to cover? (quote the surah please)

not the face
not the arms
not the legs

can men drive
can men vote
can men travel

sexist
sexist
medieval

Chazs
is it Haram or not to blow up people going about their business ?

it aint Christian
then again I'm an atheist

is it Haram to machine gun the crowd at a gig?
does Islam accept or decry that
simple question well above the belt

Again,not answering about blowing up innocent people.not one religion condemn the killing of innocent in my experience.men need to cover from navel to the knees.not specified in the Quran(as details of hijab for women aren't)but in hadiths(rules that were given by the Prophet).yes yes,it's different for men and women blah blah,as above,free not to agree with it.men are also required (in the Quran) to lower their gaze,but for some reason this is never mentioned when Islam bashing ,is it.anyway,time for bed now.

P.s.not sure it became a thread about having to defend Islam.i just came in to say,free to disagree,but we still can respect something we disagree with.

how arrogant,the belief that only westners have freedom.not freedom for others to wear/believe what they like tho?

Considering Islam mandates the death penalty for anybody who chooses to stop believing in it, I hardly think that muslims are in any position to be lecturing on freedom.

talkin raises a valid question. Numerous muslims assert that the actions of the terrorists are categorically not Islamic. Yet, there are renowned respected Islamic scholars such as Ibn Kathir and Ibn Tamiyyah who studied the Quran in depth and have interpreted the texts to indeed mandate for aggressive warfare against unbelievers.

The Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers, the Closest, then the Farthest Areas

Mohammed himself led and fought aggressive wars of expansion that mimic the brutality of IS. Its where all the jihadists get their inspiration from.

Again muslims and other apologists state that all these battles were in self-defence, but the accounts from historical sources say otherwise. Here's a translation of SI RAT RASUL ALLAH , one the earliest biographies of Muhammed that is accepted as being highly accurate. It contains a comprehensive list of all the battles fought - it's clear that a great many were instigated by him and his followers.

The big question is, is why do so many seemingly decent people continue to revere this man, who essentially was as depraved as Jihadi John ?

Dd mixed sex primary, single sex hs, mixed Catholic 6th form.
Point about short clothing is that in British culture I think it is the norm for young women to dress this way in order to put themselves out there in order to be chatted up. Not sure if it's a great system tbh

Mistressmia these writings were put forward during a time of war. Would you be holding up Churchill in the same way?

We seriously all need to find things we agree on rather than looking for differences. We are all human, differences and objections that we are not willing to accept lead to war

Mmm if you read the link, you will see that it is far from clear that the command to wage Jihad is not an on-going obligation incumbent on all muslims who are physically able to fight and that the verses in the Quran are simply a historical account of battles past.

Also if Curchill had claimed he was a messenger of God and 'the best of men' to be revered for all time, and someone who should be emulated, then I would be cursing criticising him as well, yes.

Why do you think that butchery and depravity from a supposed prophet is perfectly acceptable ?