Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

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

942 replies

JustGiveMeTwoMinutes · 13/11/2015 16:39

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?

OP posts:
mathanxiety · 21/11/2015 21:31

The head covering by some RCs (Latin Rite) is a practice that is identified with fundamentalism, focus on externals (language and appearance), segregation of men and women, and refusal to accept Vatican II, which in the centralised RC church is a big deal. The link to fundamentalism and differentiation of men and women is obvious when it comes to Christian denominations yet denied by many in the case of Islam.

In the eastern Orthodox church men's hair and beards are subject to regulation. In Orthodox Jewish practice hair of both men and women is regulated.

Within these faiths there are no obscure desert sects that have access to vast amounts of money aggressively peddling the strict regulation of women's dress both at formal prayer and in everyday life.

The following is from Wiki:
Current practice
Headcovering, at least during worship services, is still promoted or required in a few denominations, such as those in the Anabaptist tradition, as well as among the more traditional Catholics. Among these are Catholics who live a plain life and are known as Plain Catholics. Many Anabaptist denominations, including the Amish, Old Order Mennonite and Conservative Mennonites, conservative Church of the Brethren, the Old German Baptist Brethren,[24] the Hutterites,[25] and the Apostolic Christian Church; some Pentecostal churches, such as the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, The Pentecostal Mission, and the Christian Congregation in the United States, like Congregação Cristã no Brasil; the Laestadian Lutheran Church, the Plymouth Brethren; and the more conservative Scottish and Irish Presbyterian and Dutch Reformed churches. Believers Church, a denomination in India that traces its apostolic succession through the Anglican Communion, holds the wearing of headcoverings among women to be one of its traditions as well.[26] In those Christian denominations which have no official expectation that women cover, some individuals choose to practice headcovering according to their understanding of 1 Corinthians 11.

Eastern Christianity
Some Eastern Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches require women to cover their heads while in church; an example of this practice occurs in the Russian Orthodox Church.[27] In Albania, Christian women often wear white veils, although their eyes are visible; moreover, in that nation, in Orthodox Christian church buildings, women are separated from men by latticework partitions during the church service.[28]

In other cases, the choice may be individual, or vary within a country or jurisdiction. Among Orthodox women in Greece, the practice of wearing a head covering in church gradually declined over the course of the 20th century, and today is only practiced by very elderly women of a particular generation that is now over 80 years old. In the United States, the custom can vary depending on the denomination and congregation, and the origins of that congregation.

The male clergy of the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches often have long hair and untrimmed beards if they are monastics, but married clergy often have standard haircuts. Eastern Orthodox clergy of all levels have head coverings, sometimes with veils in the case of monastics or celibates, that are donned and removed at certain points in the services. In US churches they are less commonly worn.

Bishops, archimandrites and archpriests wear mitres when wearing their liturgical vestments, which have their own rules concerning donning and doffing.

Orthodox nuns wear a head covering called an apostolnik, which is worn at all times, and is the only part of the monastic habit which distinguishes them from Orthodox monks.

Western Christianity
In Continental Europe and North America at the start of the 20th century, women in most mainstream Christian denominations wore head coverings during church services.[29] These included many Anglican,[30] Baptist,[31] Methodist,[32] Presbyterian[18][19][33] and Roman Catholic Churches.[34] At worship, in parts of the Western World, many women started to wear bonnets in lieu of headcoverings, and later, hats became predominant.[35][36] However, eventually, in North America, this practiced started to decline,[29] with some exceptions, such as among conservative Mennonites and Amish, for example.[37] In nations in regions such as the Indian subcontinent, nearly all women wear head coverings during church services.[38] Female members of Jehovah's Witnesses may only lead prayer and teaching when no baptized male is available to, and must do so wearing a head covering;[39][40] male Witnesses are to remove any headcovering (hats) when representing even a small group in public prayer.[41] Female members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or "Mormons", are required to veil their faces during a part of the temple worship ceremonies

LurkingHusband · 24/11/2015 17:27

Saw this story, and it reminded me of this thread ...

A female governor was regularly forced to sit “out of sight” of her male counterparts during meetings at a Muslim faith school, inspectors have found.

(contd)

DrasticAction · 24/11/2015 18:47

lurking

I am gob smacked. Utterly Gob smacked.

"As a result, she could only contribute to the meeting through a doorway".

"At the Al-Ameen Primary School in Tyseley , pupils were not protected from “reading inappropriate literature about extremist, sexist or partisan views”, Mr Wilshaw wrote"

"For example, the library contained a book asserting that women are less reliable than men as witnesses.”"

Shock
MistressMia · 24/11/2015 19:44

For example, the library contained a book asserting that women are less reliable than men as witnesses

Well if it's allowed in the Noble Quran...

"And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. And if there are not two men [available], then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses - so that if one of the women errs, then the other can remind her" quran.com/2/282

The governess would most likely have been in agreement with the no visibility rule. So she wouldn't have viewed it as discrimination and might be quite upset at being forced to sit with the men.

Imposing Western standards of equal treatment may in fact lead to women just not coming forward to be Governors in the first place. So then what ?

This is why all faith schools should be abolished and religious education should include mandatory lessons on critiquing the individual major religions. Too much deference given to faith. It should be ridiculed and exposed for the sexist, divisive, hateful, anti intellectual man-made crap it is.

originalmavis · 24/11/2015 19:47

I was at a wedding where the chosen witness wasn't allowed (during the ceremony) because she was a woman. You can imagine how well that went down.

warmastoast · 25/11/2015 06:20

Sigh- is this thread really going to be a continuous stream of stories about misogyny in Muslim communities? Yes it exists, as it does in many cultures and faith communities, and yes it needs addressing but this discussion is not exactly probing or constructive, just critical based on superficial knowledge.

The whole women's witness issue for example has been a long standing subject of debate in the classical tradition- there are strong opinions that the extra requirement for women was just in cases where she might not have knowledge or expertise given the social conditions and that it is no longer relevant today.

A Muslim woman who wants to resist misogynistic exclusion and bring change to her environment might have more success through researching the matter and arguing her case.

DeoGratias · 25/11/2015 07:32

I think our main problem with Islam is it is Christiainity back in its dark ages. If the muslim feminist movement was a bit more forceful then atheists might regard Islam like they regard christianity - on the whole fairly okay. Instead with islam we've seen in the UK the opposite of a reformation - we've seen people going backwards to what was appropriate in deserts 2000 years ago, mothers despairing because their daughtesr are covering up. It is that fundamentalism and backwards going to the literal koran and hadiths which is the problem. It is not too hard to interpret the koran like the C of E do the bible and adapt for the modern age if you want to but the movement is not in that direction - quite the opposite.

I would certainly agree with removing all religion from all state schools but also want us all to keep up a dialogue so that we all know what each other thinks and feels - every time I see a woman with head covered I say absolutely nothing but inside I seethe at the insult to my Victorian ancestors who fought to ensure women did not have to have restrictive clothing and had equality with men. If anyone needs to be covered up force that on the men not the women.

strawberryandaflake · 25/11/2015 07:51

Yabu. It's good to have an open mind. You are asking them to display tolerance and respect, not join a cult.

It's just one day...

warmastoast · 25/11/2015 08:57

A headscarf is not a corset, or even high heels for that matter, which can be extremely painful and restrictive- though I'm not going round judging the motives of women who wear either, or necessarily pitying them unless they're in obvious pain. Making huge assumptions and seething about the clothing choices of a woman you haven't even spoken to is to me a far uglier a sign of cultural imperialism and intolerance.

If women in UK now start removing their headscarves because they feel afraid of attacks, discrimination and hostility from those around them will you feel like they've been liberated? It's very possible that many will celebrate it as a sign of enlightenment and assimilation as opposed to succumbing to threats and outright attacks. Good job guys- that sounds like real freedom right there..

DeoGratias · 25/11/2015 09:53

Yes, I would see it as a victory that those muslim women are returning to the freedom of their mothers who did not cover up. It limits your vision and sends out a message to little girls you are different from boys and there are things boys can you you can't. It really does symbolise an awful lot never mind being practically horrible - I've worn one when on business in places like Iran. I thought it might be liberating but it's dreadful. you lose peripheral vision, you are conscious of the stupid material being on your head all the time, it makes you different from the men, hinders you, curtails you and is always very hot indeed - far too warmastoast in them too.

However because the English are good about tolerance I would not ban either the burka (which the French have done in public) or the headscarf whilst enjoying my right to lobby against its use, particularly by little girls in primary schools.

EnaSharplesHairnet · 25/11/2015 10:16

There was a good story in the news of two Muslim sisters in headscarves defended from a sad lone yobbo on the Newcastle Metro by the rest of the passengers.

I think you paint too bleak a picture warmastoast.

warmastoast · 25/11/2015 10:16

I've worn one in many countries, hot and cold, and didn't feel it especially limiting- any difficulties were far more apparent in certain non-Muslim majority countries due to the levels of prejudice. It's perfectly possible to find ambitious powerful women who also cover their heads for whatever reason and are not self conscious about it as it's not defining their whole identity but is just part of a norm for them. Harassing women and bullying them for wearing it on the other hand and claiming victory when they feel forced to give it up on the other hand because they now conform to your norms is incredibly controlling on the other hand- just as bad as forcing someone to cover.

All power to Iranian women who uncover out of their own volition- but their circumstances are different and the symbolic meaning of covering too. The symbol by it's nature can have many meanings intended and projected onto it- it doesn't mean the same thing to everyone and doesn't only mean what you think it does.

warmastoast · 25/11/2015 10:21

eg, someone may shave their head as a gesture of defiance, empowerment, sacrifice, humiliation, aggression, disempowerment.. They may do it out of a intended gesture of empowerment and you see it as simply aggression. If your perceptions are so fixed that you cannot even bring yourself to discuss the meaning with the person displaying that symbol then to me that is closer to prejudice than an understanding of universal human rights.

warmastoast · 25/11/2015 10:35

I don't mean to be bleak- I think the experience for most covered women in the UK is one of being included as part of society and not seen as an oppressed other. Most of the Muslim women I know are intelligent, professional, independent and generally at ease and confident in their daily lives.

However threads like this and the increasing number of stories of attacks on covered women in public (sometimes defended, often not) are quite disturbing if you can consider them a reflection of how you are perceived generally ie, not as a person but an object of pity and oppression or even as a threat. It's sad and can even be dangerous, and far more generally depressing than any easily argued against instances of misogyny coming from within communities. Misogyny is something that can be tackled head on, pervasive prejudice based on superficial assumptions rather than your own character is what makes you feel helpless at times.

araiba · 25/11/2015 11:45

all religions are pretty much anti-women. they were made up by men

to me, the biggest benefit of getting rid of religion would be the empowerment of women worldwide

but at the same time i really enjoy visiting religious building of all types and will follow their customs while i visit because at the end of the visit, they have no power over me

Translator1000 · 25/11/2015 12:06

This is why all faith schools should be abolished

^ this. When children of different faiths all go to school together they have the opportunity to see that people are fundamentally the same despite their "religion". Much better than being segregated from all those who are "different" all of the time - while at school and while at home.

Sadly I don't think religious schools - of all denominations - will be abolished in the UK any time soon.

Toadinthehole · 25/11/2015 18:13

Yes, it won't happen because most people know it would be a massive overreaction.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page