'I don't shake women's hands'

[canary1]

In a work setting today, a client was seen by four colleagues, 2 male, 2 female. The client shook hands with the two male colleagues at the end, and when I held my hand out in expectation, this is what he said. I know many muslims and never ran into this before, though this is his reason. I'm disgusted at such overt sexism dressed up as religion. I can't say that's just his beliefs any more than I can excuse any other overt discriminatory behaviour. How is this regarded as an acceptable way to behave?

"skimpy clothing, drinking booze and snogging someone who wasn't my husband in a strict Muslim country,"

Local laws in many places would indeed result in arrest.

Tell me, what law is being broken when a man doesnt shake your had. And is there a law that could be applied that a man could face arrest in this country for forcing a woman to touch him when she says no? I think there is. But its culture to shake hands no matter how much the woman says no?

Well, no. The OP is spurious and not convincing as to whetrehr this actually happened, and OP person hasn't been seen for dust. So yup, looks like a Kipper set up whether you wish to acknowledge it or not.

Regardless of that, your intention is just to shut down debate by labelling it 'kipper' to discuss it.

and saying 'ffs' doesn't strengthen a position

It wasn't supposed to. It was simply to express my frustration at an extremely cliched, hackney and transparent attempt to shut down debate.

Just a little Britisher one. With a self-identified muslim woman being invited to join Islamic State.

Well done OP Nigel.

I did say the majority of posters. If you want to attribute one post to everybody else then you're exactly the same as people who think all Muslims are bombers just because one is.

'Little Britishers' and 'Nige' is just another attempt to shut down debate by chucking nasty labels around.

In fact, I think you have been one of the most intolerant bigoted posters on this thread with your insistence people can do what they want and you don't give a shit if it causes offence. You're a bit like a Brit who goes on holiday to the Costas and gets shitfaced on John Smith's and starts chucking around beach chairs and shouting 'get your tits out'. 'It's my culture innit, it's what the lads do'.

Rebecca You just said about taking your culture to Iraq you didn't mention forcing people to sit next to you while you were uncovered, drinking and eating pork. Personally I wouldn't like it, but it wouldn't be the end of the world, you aren't making me join in. Plenty of Iraqis would be happy to though

Amazed at the number of people who still think anyone is trying to demand .....

and

we shouldn't complain about discriminatory behaviour though

To claim discrimination is to demand something that other people are getting (or protection from not getting). Your two points are inconsistent. You are saying that a man can claim discrimination if a woman shakes hands with other women but does not shake hands with them.

Tell me, what law is being broken when a man doesnt shake your had.

Civil laws. If an employee persisted in shaking just men's hands rather than nobody's then the company would be entitled to sack him for sex discrimination and he would have no case for religious discrimination as an alternative had been offered. Because sigh there is no requirement men must be touched.

Ditto if a company declined to do business with someone for the same reason.

Elton, you def have a problem with reading and comprehension - your little rant displays this and suggests you need to get something else done in your life today than being an apologist for hard of thinking.
I'm not trying to 'shut down debate' - it's a public forum and that sort of accusation went out round here a long time ago as it's evidence of those with nothing else left to say.

To be fair Stateless, the only Iraqis I know (they live in London) all drink far more than I do!!

Scottish - ah, so you're distinguishing between a law and a cultural/politeness issue... no. the whole point here is that a (admittedly possibly fictitious) man treated a woman differently to men purely because of her sex. Because HIS religious beliefs trumped hers to be treated equally, in his mind. Do you agree that it was ok for him to do so? And if so, where do you stop thinking it's ok to treat people differently on the grounds of their sex and your religion?

Why has my post been deleted @MNHQ? I can only assume this was a mistake because all I did was quote a members post who hysterically accused me of being racist and theirs hasn't been deleted?

To claim discrimination is to demand something that other people are getting (or protection from not getting)

That's a bit of a superficial perspective. My desire is that people didn't believe it acceptable (or necessary) to treat others differently based on sex/race/whatever in the first place, rather than a desire for them to act in a way that is opposed to those beliefs after the fact.

Anyway, I can justifiably complain about how stupid somebody is without necessarily demanding that they change.

Treat people differently (in this case afford then less respect) because of their sex.
I struggle to understand how people don't think this is sexism tbh.

Are people on this thread really saying that this man should disregard his religious beliefs to prove to you that he's not sexist? How ridiculous.

And if someone tried to make you all do something that may be against your beliefs or personal rules then you'd all be up in arms.

For fucks sake.

To claim discrimination is to demand something that other people are getting (or protection from not ).

Is it bollocks. Here is a definition:

But in the context of civil rights law, unlawful discrimination refers to unfair or unequal treatment of an individual (or group) based on certain characteristics

So they don't have to be 'getting something', it can just be on the basis of being treated differently. Like not having your hand shaken because of the group they belong to.

You are saying that a man can claim discrimination if a woman shakes hands with other women but does not shake hands with them.

They certainly could. It's always harder to prove discrimination against men. But if they could prove, for example, that they were disadvantaged because of an boss interacting mainly with female colleagues and avoiding interaction with them then, yes, they could.

"Because HIS religious beliefs trumped hers to be treated equally, in his mind. Do you agree that it was ok for him to do so?"

Yes. But lets be clear. I am a humanist, do not believe in God and think all religion is made-up and often monumentally stupid.

However. We accept religion. We aceept religion in our society. We accept the rules and controls that religion still places up us. We accept religions with no female leaders (Catholics) and listen to them as if they have any value. We defer to religion on moral and ethical grounds more than we do individual human need (abortion, same sex marriage). We accept schools that discriminate against women (Jewish schools). We accept and laud in our societies religions that oppress women all over the world. Because its religion. And therefore special.

We accept people can have a Muslim faith. We can accept that they have certain beliefs. We can accept that some of this includes no touching of the opposite sex. Oh cant we? I mean, look at everything else that gets accepted and then it comes down to hurt feelings about a handshake. In the week of the centenary of women getting the vote there is a worry about a handshake? In his mind, he was treating her as he treats every women bar his blood family. Equality is not based on handshake. Its based on the totality of the relationship. I looked for respect at work. Recognition of my skills. Acceptance of my ideas. The use of the evidence I put forward. Whose hands get fondled when affects none of that.

And I say it again, Muslim women do it as well and if its to be an issue of equality then its going to be fun watching men complaining about not being touched....

And if someone tried to make you all do something that may be against your beliefs or personal rules then you'd all be up in arms.

No one is proposing making this man shake a woman's hand. The suggestion is that he avoid discriminating by shaking no one's hand.

We can accept that some of this includes no touching of the opposite sex. Oh cant we?

Yes we can. At the same time as asking them to respect our culture of treating the sexes equally by either not shaking anybody's hand or shaking everybody's.

It depends how it's done. If he ignored her then it would be a snub. If he greeted her in a respectful manner then it wouldn't be. Shaking hands is not the only form of greeting in a British business setting.

What is it you think SHOULD happen if a man doesn’t want to shake a woman’s hand, or a woman a mans?

That's been covered already. No ones hand should be shaken in this case, as its a professional setting.

Absolutely everything Elton has said.
MrPan your posts smack of sexism & pathetic attempts to censor those who don’t agree with being discriminated against, whatever the reason for discrimination may be.
Why is the choice to believe that women should be treated differently more important than a woman’s right to be treated the same as her male colleagues in a business setting?

Scottishdiem

Yes we allow some religious requirements to have exemption from UK law, however not all. There is no requirement in Islam to not touch women. Only a cultural convention

If I refused to shake hands with the women I worked with, bit happily shook the men's hands, that would be sexual discrimination because I am treating women in a less respectful way on the basis of their sex.

Your suggesting a person should be able to do that because of their religion?

Because HIS religious beliefs trumped hers to be treated equally, in his mind. Do you agree that it was ok for him to do so?"

No it doesn't, we've been over this too, when the cases were discussed.

So you are a leading Muslim Scholar are you Patriarchy? www.dar-alifta.org/Foreign/ViewFatwa.aspx?ID=6808

The issue is not absolute so takes scholarly jurisprudence. Not unlike Catholic rules. If we don't respect women and their choices regarding their faith on this, why do we do it on others? Like Catholic nurses and abortion?

Scottishdiem

Do you honestly think that the UK legal system should be driven by the ins and outs of obscure Islamic scholarly debate?

There is no fixed rule in Islam that states men cannot touch women. Just a lot of old fashioned Arabic cultural nonsense dressed up as religious requirement. Millions of Muslims around the globe touch women who aren't their family on a daily basis.

I'm no legal expert that's true, but the UK legal system would attempt to take a reasonable view on whether expecting a man to not disrespect people he works with based on their sex is an unreasonable expectation when considered against his religion.

Particularly when an acceptable alternative exists (just not shaking hands with anyone).

If the OP were to make a case of sex discrimination based on this, a man using the defence 'its my religion to not touch women' would probably struggle to get anywhere. (Exactly the same as people refusing to serve homosexuals on the grounds of religion failed to win their case.)

Shaking hands is not the only form of greeting in a British business setting.

Good. Then he can use the same one for everybody.