To think that some types of 'western dress' e.g; high heels are as oppressive as the burka?

[malificent7]

Don't get me wrong; I have worn heels in the past in the dubious hope that they look 'sexy.' I have mostly ended up hobbling along at the end of the evening in pain and fed up, envious of those wearing trainers.
I do realise that women have a 'choice ' to wear garments such as heels, mini skirts and boob tubes but aibu to think that they are not garments of liberation but rather an over sexualised aesthetic imposed by the patriarchy.

I am not a massive fan of the burka and I do think that they have been enforced by the patriarchy for a different reason; to protect the modesty of the woman. I am very against the burka ban and I think Boris Johnson is a prick for his comments.

So both types of dress control women in different ways; the western dress to promote sexuality and the burka to hide it.

In short, women should wear what they want without government enforcement and comments from Boris and his ilk.

And before we talk about seeing women's faces when we talk to them and the obstruction to that that the burka causes; what about a full face of slap that many western girls embrace now?

Nigellas

Not the first time I’ve heard that comparison. During a visit to middle east I was required to wear the abaya. An American businessman said it was really no different to him wearing a tie to business meetings.

Op I see where you are coming from. I don't think heels etc are enforced at the macro and micro level the burka is but there are certainly parallels and you can see it through the ages.

I read a profile on in line dating the other day that read 'must be as comfortable wearing heels as in flats' as in that's what the bloke wanted. My first though was odfod and swiped left.

Anita Roddick gave her best advice as don't smoke and don't wear heels. I rarely wear heels but I don't have a partner so I can't do what I want ;-)

Why does everyone think that because women choose to cover their faces it makes it all ok?

It’s still part of a culture that offers up a rationale of covered face = modesty = good = closer to God. That’s a seriously illogical string of conclusions.

And to top it all off God doesn’t even exist.

Heels are crap too. But slightly less culturally enforced across the world.

A lot of people keep insinuating that the women who wear the niqab are forced to do so. I really don’t believe that is the case in U.K. (read my previous posts).

Also, there’s a fine line between what women are told to do and the rights of women generally.

For example, I believe it is oppressive that women have to take on their husbands name, you as a woman are not his property.
Women are constantly on pay battles, because men are paid more.
Women still struggle to achieve the same roles as men.

Inequality is open, it is the men who control and set rules. Therefore, if we assume women in niqab are following the masculine rules, then unfortunately we all are.

You’ll notice many threads on here, where women have been coerced to give passwords, expected to stop work and only carry out housework.

Just pointing out that it’s a greater ‘problem’ than most have acknowledged regarding the ‘man rules’.

Of course, if women are forced than that is not acceptable, but as I said, I am still to find a woman in the U.K. who has been forced into wearing niqab.
As previously pointed out, Orthodox Jews, orthodox Christians, orthodox Sikhs, orthodox Muslims etc etc all have rules with regards to clothing they follow.

So there are women who choose to be covered being interviewed, going on social media or whatever, saying that they are not forced to do it, it's their decision etc .... but the women who ARE forced to wear it are no doubt also in the situation where they would not/are not allowed to give a public opinion - so it's not much of a defence.

ifyousee I tried to explain this in a previous post. It is about feeling devout of closer to God, the same reason a sect in Judaism where women wear burqa and niqab, the same reason a nun chooses to dress as she does and does not marry...if we don’t like the idea of people worshipping God and choosing dress according to it, which group would you ban first

ging of course it’s not right women being forced. But how do you ‘police’ that? In France, before the headscarf ban, the same argument was used, we are helping the few girls who are forced to wear the headscarf. However, to save some on one side you decide to do the exact same to those who choose.
It’s a hit and miss.

During a visit to middle east I was required to wear the abaya. An American businessman said it was really no different to him wearing a tie to business meetings. hmm

It’s a bonkers comparison I agree. I wonder who would have fared worse if you’d both refused to wear abaya /tie.

They don’t carry the same message or the same level of restrictions.

Why would you choose to wear a burqa,?you can’t ride a bike, walk your dogs, ride a horse, swimming is banned for these women, yet I see the men swimming around with their children while the women are left to watch and cook in the sun on the side of the pool. Can you drive in them, is it legal?

If it's about choice, then why is it forbidden for women to wear western dress in certain countries, but not forbidden to wear a burqa in western societies?

And the argument about school uniform is ridiculous! The burqa is about hiding women's bodies. Men's bodies are fine, apparently.

Women in burqas often wear heels underneath!

Women saying they are not forced to wear a burqa or niqab, are surely being disingenuous or naive. In very religiously observant commu ities there is pressure on people to 'conform' in many ways. Surely they accept that?
The poem earlier on in the thread where the woman says she dresses to please Allah ad the laws of Allah, well they were written by a man/men.
All organised religion is about identity, power and control.
I grew up in the midst of a large very orthodox Jewish community. The men and women had to conform. Even the less orthodox conformed in dress - ie the women would dress modestly with skirts never showing their knees, always wore thick tights, were not allowed to wear trousers, heads covered if they did not wear a wig once married, arms not showing anything from elbows upwards, not revealing collar bones.
Men had similarly strict expectations which they followed at all times publicly.
They might not be 'forced' but there is pressure and expectation from the community and it would be hard to make a different choice and live within the community in an observant household.

Personally, I find the niqab and the burqa intimidating. I have no issue with a hijab or chador but the burqa and niqab stop me being able to trust someone. I look at faces and expressions and people's reactions, their eyes, their mouths, to help me form my judgement about can I trust someone. If I can't do that, that feeling of trust is not there.

I would not leave DS or DD at nursery to be looked after by someone in a niqab or a burqa. I would feel extremely uncomfortable. Nor would I want them being taught in a school where staff wore them.

Similarly I would not be examined/treated by a Dr wearing a niqab or a burqa, or a dentist or optician, or take my pets to a vet who wore them. I would not feel comfortable letting someone into my house wearing one - for example if I booked a financial advisor visit or an architect visit. I want to see the faces of who I am dealing with if I need to trust them.

Nothing to do with their religion, I just want to see their face and communicate with that face and feel I can trust them.

Why do people seem so reluctant to believe that there are women in the UK today who are forced to wear a face-covering? Does it not occur that women who are forced into making such a "choice" are unlikely to be afforded the opportunity to say publicly that they are unhappy to do so?

Having said that, I have never come across a Dr or dentist or optician in a niqab or burqa.

We did have a teaching assistant who turned up for an interview in a niqab and when we talked to the candidates about our dress code she withdrew from the post.

jaxhog using your argument, ‘western dress is forced’ in countries like France and China (and more), these countries openly ban headscarves and any other visible attire. In China, men are also told to shave their beards.
So, why is western dress forced in these countries? And where is choice? Each country has its rule, you really can’t use that argument

Lulujakey1 because when you sign up to these courses at university, the application bookelt specifically states, you cannot wear face veil...and this was clearly written 15+ years ago when I was attending university. There were, however 2 friends who carried out clinics wearing niqab (opticians).

The thing is if you ban it these women won’t be able to go out, at least they have some freedom with them on.

*LonelyStranger
*
If it's all just about feeling closer to god, why don't men wear them too? Don't they want to feel closer to god?

You see, this is where all of these apologetics people engage in fall apart....we are talking about women and only women. If wearing a burka was so wonderful, why don't men wear them? They don't even have to wear headscarfs.

Explain exactly why only women have to walk around in tents, but not men. What do women have that men don't? Seriously, try answering that.

People can tap dance around this all they like...when women are expected to cover up, whether they are Muslim or Christians, it's for matters of "modesty". A modesty that no man has ever had to display.

While I don't believe they should be banned, neither do I believe that it's "racist" to point out how contrary to the national values we try to promote the burka is. Because it is & being shouted down for telling the truth is becoming depressingly common.

Banana I thought men do adhere to dress codes? Isn’t that why the orthodox Muslim men wear white robes? The Jewish men adhere to a dress code too (orthodox) as do Christian?
I’m confused why people pick up on the orthodox women and not men in the same sentence?

So the principles of freedom reach out to controlling men to create a network to force their women to do this in the name of freedom .. But not to the women forced to walk around like this?

The inconvenient truth is that if you have principles of freedom, they apply equally to people you disagree with.

The answers to the situation are to punish people for domestic abuse not the women involved (and pontentially letting them in for recriminations the rest of us won't be there to protect them from), and stand by those principles of freedom when people criticize ideologies that legitimize behaviour they consider unacceptable.

By doing both of these, by merely upholding freedom under the rule of law rather than abandoning principles for one-way pragmatic laws than "ban" certain people and their freedom, we attack the problem from both important angles: the practical and the ideological.

laws that "ban"

It seems like so many people are strongly agsinst the niquab. But there doesn’t seem to equal weight given to this viewpoint in the media. I am frustrated that the public debate tiptoes around the misogynistic mindset behind them, that women should be covered up. Is feminism now consigned to mostly female chatrooms? How can our voices get heard irl?

Well for a start by not throwing your weight behind the idea that we silence criticism. It is a small thing and people do it to try and be kind, but the reality is every time we do this we contribute a bit more to the prevailing notion that some bad ideas must not be challenged.

In a free society everyone must be free to challenge what they consider bad ideas (must because otherwise it isn't one). Almost every bit of progress we have made has been in the face of people who would ban discussion of it, it has often been things considered morally wrong and often deemed outrageous to speak out on it.

If we help to repress discussion or criticism of a rapidly spreading religion that we think has bad ideas, we feel kindly in the moment but actually we prevent peaceful ideas-based change and ultimately run the risk of bringing about more widespread suffering.

TL;DR all we have to actually do is stick to our traditional philosophical standpoints on free expression, and discussion will have the biggest impact on people changing their minds. Not lose ourselves and start banning people saying this, wearing that, and so on, like Iran would do.