When did we become ok with the burka?

[Banana8080]

In my childhood (80s90s) I remember being sad some Muslim women were pressured not to show their full faces in public ie become invisible. These days much more focus on a women right to choose aka wear the full vail, even those who are possible under pressure.

When/why did this change happen?

I used to spend a lot of time in Marseille those who know the place will know it has a high population of Muslims that were mainly North African (it felt like being in some North African cities)

Rarely did you see young women in hajabs and certainly never saw niqabs my ex dh first saw a women in a niqab who had lived in North Africa and Marseille here in London when he was in his 20’s he was astounded by how many women were

The influence of a more conservative form of Islam has certainly come from the rise of the influence from Wahhabism. And of course some are making a political and religious statement

But at times laws have been made to curb religion and freedom of how one practices their religion as it is seen for the better for the society as a whole

I am not in favor of banning the hijab (apart from young girls wearing it at school - the argument about wanting to be like mummy is ridiculous I wanted high heels at 5 I wasn’t allowed them) or for the total ban of the niqab/burka/full face veil

What I do support is the face veil in whatever form being banned for pupils and workers in public office

That may upset a few women and it may unfortunately keep a few more even more isolated but this is already happened that isn’t down to our society its down to the misogyny of their family/culture: What I don’t think we should be doing is supporting extreme religious practice that by the very nature of the design sepetates a group of women it was designed to keep women annoymous that isn’t progression it’s supporting a deeply misogynistic view of women

Some women may choose to be a second wife I wouldn’t support this either along with many other so called religious practices does that curb freedom absolutely but it’s better for society as a whole

What I do support is the face veil in whatever form being banned for pupils and workers in public office

It mainly already is and we haven’t needed legislation to do it, just dress or uniform codes. See the NHS here:

www.nhsemployers.org/your-workforce/plan/building-a-diverse-workforce/need-to-know/wearing-face-veils-in-the-workplace

Seems like a much more sensible policy. Obviously patients aren’t going to want to be treated by someone with a veil on, and in areas where communication is essential like training or some admin jobs or reception you can’t either; but if someone has a back office job dealing with files or doing data input it isn’t going to have a huge impact.

Ofsted automatically rates any school where a teacher wears them as inadequate which has effectively banned them in almost all schools.

You can’t wear it in the police either. West Mids police said they might consider it but they had never had an applicant who wants to wear one. Which does sum up why it’s a bit of a moral panic too, because women who wear full face veils follow a form of Islam which means they’re highly unlikely to work anyway.

There are better and more flexible ways of dealing with this than blanket bans which make one section of society feel persecuted.

But at times laws have been made to curb religion and freedom of how one practices their religion as it is seen for the better for the society as a whole

Not in this country it’s not. We have a long history of religious tolerance and freedom and the times when we had laws curbing with religious practice are widely seen as some of the worst and most repressive of our history. Nobody remembers Bloody Mary or the Puritans with any misty eyed fondness. We do celebrate Good Queen Bess who had no desire to ‘make windows in men’s souls’ and a ‘glorious’ revolution against a potential return to Catholic repression (although banning Catholic monarchs is posssibly one of the few examples I can think of where we do put curbs on religion, and certain legal processes like marriages and deaths can’t be registered by some religious officials because they don’t have official systems for appointments and checks in the same way Christian Churches do).

So no, we have barely ever done it in the last 300 years, when we did it before it didn’t work. And it’s certainly not seen as ‘better for society as a whole’ in the U.K., quite the opposite. We have a long and proud tradition as a country which has championed religious freedom and curbs on religion are overwhelmingly as a bad thing. Religious freedom is one of the things that made Britain, Britain. We were pioneers of it and fought to protect it.

Women are allowed to be beaten in some circumstances not here we are not, a man can’t rape his wife thankfully not since 1991 has this been a non crime, financial rights over property are equal, contraception women have the right to decide on this and then the right to abortion (though unfortunately not in NI), women have the right to divorce and are equal as a witness in courts of law

And then we have the religious practices that are somewhat vague but still upheld by religious scolars that have been made illegal

So we don’t have religious freedom in this country we may have allowed for more allowances but we don’t have religious freedom

Thankfully

And I am aware of the NHS rules and I think it will be put in law for other work areas soon and I hope schools as the case for this area of religious freedom is deeply misogynistic and greatly pushed by groups that want and support separation in society

@geraldine170 most of the women I know who wear it are deobandis a nd are against salafis

Deobandis are Hanafi though aren’t they and share a lot of beliefs with Wahabis even though they aren’t the same, the Saudis certainly thought so and pushed funding at them for a while. They are ultra conservative and have links to the Taliban.

And they’re not keen on integration either as the movement was set up in India to protect the Muslim identity from British influences during the Empire. Quite a good article o it here and the influence deobandis have had on Conservitising British Islam in recent years:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.spectator.co.uk/2014/06/who-runs-our-mosques/amp/

Women are allowed to be beaten in some circumstances not here we are not, a man can’t rape his wife thankfully not since 1991 has this been a non crime, financial rights over property are equal, contraception women have the right to decide on this and then the right to abortion (though unfortunately not in NI), women have the right to divorce and are equal as a witness in courts of law

That’s a bit irrelevant. Beating or raping your wife is not a requirement of any religion and then being illegal doesn’t limit anybody’s right to meet what they believe is the requirement of their religion. Neither do equal financial rights or living in a non-Islamic state which doesn’t stick to Islamic jurisprudence (which I’m fairly sure doesn’t always treat women’s evidence that way in every interpretation and isn’t even used in some Islamic countries like Turkey).

Abortion and contraception are regarded as sins by some religions, banning them is an example of religious intolerance as it fails to recognise that there are some people in society who don’t share that belief and want to access them.

In fact what you are suggesting has much more in common with those who want to ban abortion than those who want it available.

Secularism is a belief system like any other with good points and draw backs. But you are convinced it is right so you want to impose your beliefs on others using legislation to ban women dressing in a way which offends your belief system rather than letting them have the have the freedom to choose.

Catholicism is a belief system like any other with good points and draw backs. But some Catholics are convinced it is right so want to impose their beliefs on others using legislation to ban women access to family planning and abortions which offend their belief system rather than letting them have the freedom to choose.

Islam is a belief system like any other with good points and draw backs. But some Muslims are convinced they are right so they want to impose their beliefs on others using legislation to ban women dressing in a way which offends their belief system rather than letting them have the freedom to choose.

You’re not suggesting anything new or broad minded. You’re just another rather myopic and blinkered adherent of a belief system who can’t understand that just because you don’t approve of something doesn’t mean the law has to force other women into behaving in a way you approve of.

Abortion and contraception campaigns have always been about a woman’s right to choose - not about using the law to coerce women into behaving in a way that somebody else’s belief system says they should.

I’m a bit justified why you would compare legislating to tell women what they can and can’t wear to a campaign which has always been about a woman’s right to choose. The two are diametrically opposed, you want to take away women’s choice to dress as they wish, not give it to them.

It isn’t irrelevant when religious text can be used in court

Thankfully here we have laws that have been made to protect us laws that have been written in to override what religion allows

So once again we do not have freedom of religion laws have been put in place to stop that

I am against allowing the niqab/face veil being worn in all areas of life because I think as a progressive society we need to take a stand against a deeply rooted misogynistic view of women I have never totally agreed to a full ban

Myopic I have never suggested that what I believe in is anything new. I do have a better than some understanding of Islam and Asian and Arab Muslim culture (family - it’s not the same), read and studied the Koran, and have lived in a Muslim country. Many Muslim women (not all) are perplexed why white feminist would support what they see as fabric chains

And I am not offended by women who wears a niqab I have never claimed all are forced to but I am aware of the deeply rooted misogyny (which I would never claim we are free from) that is having an influence in our society and more so is creating divisions one which those who are in support of a more restrictive and extreme Islam would support - that I do not see as a positive in any shape or form

I think that women shouldn't be stopped from wearing them if that's their wish, but equally people are allowed not to like it.

It isn’t irrelevant when religious text can be used in court

It is irrelevant. It’s completely irrelevant. For one thing, many Muslims don’t feel it is a requirement of their religion to live in a country which follows Sharia jurisprudence and are quite content they are free to practice their religion as they wish within British law. For another thing, if people in the U.K. want to deal with disputes using Sharia law they are completely free to do so under British law by using independent Islamic Courts as Jewish people use the Beth Din. It’s called arbitration and the Islamic Court acts as arbitrator. Jewish people do it through the Beth Din too and many white British people use it too through arbitrators like solicitors. And no, women don’t get to use British laws about equal property rights etc. If you want to get exercised about women’s rights you’d make better use of your time campaigning for a watchdog to oversee arbitration decisions and ensure women aren’t being pressured to sign away their rights. So you are wrong, British law does contain a get out for those who want to use a separate legal system.

I am against allowing the niqab/face veil being worn in all areas of life because I think as a progressive society we need to take a stand against a deeply rooted misogynistic view of women I have never totally agreed to a full ban*

But you do want legislation to ban it in certain areas of life? Or you certainly gave that impression by advocating the French system.

Even though we know that public sector organisations are dealing with this issue quite well and sensibly (and also say it is a tiny issue anyway which affects hardly any employees)?

It’s unnecessary legislation which we are coping well without using a flexible case by case system. We don’t need legislation to cover things which can usually be sorted using grown up common sense.

Again, you are saying ‘we’ as a ‘progressive society’ need to ‘take a stand’. Firstly ‘we’ assumes we are all of the same opinion and your idea of a progressive society is not necessarily the same as someone else’s. I don’t think legislating about what women can wear ‘just because’ rather than due to a genuine need is progressive. For goodness sake, if you work as a nurse or doctor or police officer and wear a motorcycle helmet you’d be sacked and we still use the same principles for Islamic face coverings in the public sector.

Many Muslim women (not all) are perplexed why white feminist would support what they see as fabric chains

I don’t support ‘fabric chains’. I support the rights of women not to wear the niqab or burka or hijab in countries where they are forced to just as much as I support the rights of women here to wear them if they wish. I support the right of women who are forced to wear it in this country to access the police and courts and organisations like Refuge and Women’s Aid to flee people who compel them to do it. I just basically support female autonomy.

I would never claim we are free from) that is having an influence in our society and more so is creating divisions one which those who are in support of a more restrictive and extreme Islam would support - that I do not see as a positive in any shape or form

Do you really think singling out females, just females, from one religious group and aiming legislation at them covering what they wear will stop division in society? Remember for a moment that the overwhelming majority of people involved in Islamic jihad are men. Why would we single out Muslim women for a punitive law? If a woman is being forced to wear a niqab surely it would be better for her to be able to go out of the house and go to work, earn her own money and have some sort of autonomy in the rest of her life? If it is misogyny and men forcing women to wear it then you are doubly punishing them because not only do they have a horrible husband and a miserable homelife they’re being punished for someone else’s decision by being pushed out of public sector jobs.

And given that we have a Muslim community where many people are still smarting over injustices over western military action in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, etc which have given extremists plenty of ammunition, why on earth would you pass laws which would magnify that sense of grievance and persecution? Over something as comparatively trivial as clothes? An issue we’re dealing with fine without resorting to legislation singling out a single religious group.

I think that women shouldn't be stopped from wearing them if that's their wish, but equally people are allowed not to like it.

Well quite. That’s exactly what I’m trying to say, but you don’t blather on as much as me and just get to the point.

"I think that women shouldn't be stopped from wearing them if that's their wish, but equally people are allowed not to like it."

This sums up my views on the matter. At the end of the day, our western society has evolved to place a certain amount of emphasis on body language and facial expressions. If I cannot see the person whom I am talking to I cannot communicate as effectively and frankly I cannot gain a sense of trust in the person. I'm afraid I see the burka/niqab as a negative barrier to communication and trust and I would hate to live in a society where all women wore them.

I have said laws protect us

That people choose to believe in their religion and follow the law of their religion is down to them to some extent (full autonomy well I wouldn’t totally agree we have that bigamy for one I don’t agree with thankfully against the law here and isn’t recognized ) but should a women let’s say goes to the police and makes a complaint that her husband has raped her the law is on her side religion isn’t

As for women who are forced to wear the niqab sadly many will have little to do with people outside their community or working in public office there are not reaching out for support or running to refuges (never saw a woman in a niqab while working in dv in a diverse area we knew they were going to a&e) they get support within their community and it’s shameful how we have ignored the abuse of another generation of many girls I think this has come from a stance of respecting another culture or rather let’s not look too judgemental either way it’s shameful

The issues run deep in many Arab counties corruption, disempowerment, poverty and lack of opportunities and of cours the issues of the wars I really don’t think not allowing women to wear a piece of misogynistic clothing in public office is going to stir up much more resentment it’s already there and there will always be those that will stir up any hatred towards in what they see as evil western ways

I think I’ve made my point

Enthusiam I also lived in marseille and hated the misogyny.

Yes It’s quite bad in Marseille

But worse in North Africa even in liberal countries and has got worse since the Arab Spring

Not long ago in a town in the North East, I saw a young woman and child running towards the mosque for prayers. The boy wore appropriate western clothing and his mother was totally covered, but in a light robe. A cold north wind arrived and the woman’s robes revealed jeans and a t shirt underneath, worn with sandals.

All I could think was that she would have been better off in a warm coat with proper shoes. In the same area we often see people wearing sandals in winter with light cotton clothing. They must be freezing with the cold climate up here and hate to think what their heating bills must be like if they wear these indoors. The indigenous population never wear sandals outside except in warm summer months. Boots/shoes/trainers and jumpers are the norm, with a coat on top. In winter additional layers are added as necessary.

Why are so many people taken in by their religion and follow it so blindly, and also think that theirs is the only true one. It isnt.

So the idea of ever meeting these women say over a cup of tea for chat is not going to happen as the strict religion of Islam they follow does not allow intergration.

“Beating or raping your wife is not a requirement of any religion”

Well not a requirement no, but the Quran does state you can “lightly” beat your wife as long as you don’t leave any marks and after certain other tactics have been exhausted.

The Quran does not say anything about women covering their faces. It does refer to them covering their hair and chest areas, as well as recommending that men should lower their gaze.

So there are things that our society does not have to tolerate (ie wife beating or polygamy), even though these are explicit in religious texts. Why should face covering be any different, especially when there is nothing in religious texts to even support this in the first place?

There is no school or interpretation of Islam which says you have beat or rape your wife. No man has his right to live a peaceful, normal life doing no harm to others curtailed by laws preventing him from beating or raping his wife.

We do tolerate polyagamy and polyamory. We might not endorse it with official certificate but we tolerate people living polyamorous or polygamous lifestyles and in some cases it can gain financial reward from the state to do it because we turn such a blind eye.

It’s amazing how some women claim they’re feminists but only get worked up about Muslim women’s clothes and aren’t even aware that we have systems like arbitration taking away Muslim women’s rights and a benefit system which encourages polygamy. But then it’s much easier to give women a kicking than actually take on real problems that involve men isn’t it?

Talk about getting your priorities wrong.

“Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand“

I’m not saying the face covering issue is the priority Geraldine. None of these issues are mutually exclusive and this is the point.

Now I’m sure someone will be along in a minute to say that this translation of the Quran is incorrect etc and that “strike” actually means something else, but if this is the case, why are they happy to have billions of this English translation sold in just about every bookshop going?

And how does the UK benefit system support polygamy - can you explain please? If you mean it makes it to easy for feckless men to father multiple children by multiple women and bugger off, paying minimal child support to them all, then yes, I agree. But I don’t think the benefits system is designed to support polygamy in the Islamic sense?

I did know about arbitration laws and i’m Not kicking the women that wear it but to say it’s their own choice is wrong. We should as women be sticking together to protect all women in the UK whatever religion or race they come from. We can’t change the laws in other countries but we should be starting here.

Yes. But the advice to strike your wife is just that - advice. Not an edict, not a law, not a requirement. No school of Islam says you must hit your wife if you are a Muslim.

Some schools of Islam say you must cover your face to if your are a Muslim.

There is a difference between advice from a religion and requirements. Jesus advised me to turn the other cheek. I quite regularly don’t, but I go to communion as Jesus required me to and say sorry and it’s all okay again. Big difference between advice and requirements.

It’s amazing people never call for laws to stop men forcing women to wear it, they just call for laws to stop women choosing to do it. Us girls eh! Can’t be bothering our silly little heads about what to wear! We need a husband or better still a law to tell us! Otherwise we’d go out with our pants on our heads and our bras on our feet!

The list of things a man must do to keep his wife happy is long. www.google.co.uk/amp/s/backtojannah.com/rights-of-a-wife/amp/

A man who thinks he has the right to hit his wife would be asked if he is fulfilling all of his requirements. I'm betting 100% of men would fall short.

And what does Islam say about multiple wives?

GeraldineIf there was that law, stopping men from forcing women to wear it, it would have the same outcome as just banning it.....the men wouldn’t be allowed to force it would they, so the same result in a more direct workable way? But the trouble then is, some men might not allow the women to leave the house......