To think it's ironic about Niqab and face coverings

[IsntItIronicDontYouThink]

Just thought about this and how ironically, face coverings have become mandatory on public transports and it makes me think of Muslim women (Niqab wearing women specifically) who've had a hard time because of their face coverings to now find that everyone has to cover their faces (for different reasons yes but still ironic, isn't it?)

Googled to see if anyone else mentions this. Here's a piece I found about it (There's more but just picked this one).

www.google.com/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2020/06/12/face-mask-compulsory-muslim-women-12838585/amp/

We are finding wearing masks at work does restrict communication as people do rely very much on facial expressions not just tone of voice and what is being said

I work in mh (certainly impacts 1-1 therapeutic work)

@Linning are you high? What on earth are you rambling on about. I am not the one imposing ore conditions on people - Islam is doing that for millions of women all over the world (not the men - how convenient). The point is it is totally ridiculous to attribute so much to a piece of cloth. In reality it makes zero difference if nine million men look at a Muslim women without a covering or if none do. It’s all in the head and totally irrational. If a Muslim woman goes out without a covering she should still feel close to god and that her husband should love and respect her. If he won’t and god won’t without a covering that is the man and the religion imposing this on a woman. To even believe that you’re only special to your husband if no other man sees you harks back to that disgusting era of virgins being so important and pure and other women tainted. That’s my issue. And my Muslim friends only wear one through coercion and that makes me angry. Painting this idealised view of covering up is disingenuous “oh I’m so special my beauty is only for my husband and it’s all thanks to this big lump of fabric “ without it... you would be exactly the same.

"you don’t hear an uproar that communication Has ceased" you don't hear it Linning - naturally you didn't, but in the real world it has been an issue since the mask wearing began.
If you were interested you could find plenty of people having a problem with it on mumsnet and in the media.

There was a lot of concern for deaf people and even more for children if their teachers wore masks. Some people with autism found both wearing the mask and confronting people with masks difficult.

[quote Dancethereupontheshore]@Linning are you high? What on earth are you rambling on about. I am not the one imposing ore conditions on people - Islam is doing that for millions of women all over the world (not the men - how convenient). The point is it is totally ridiculous to attribute so much to a piece of cloth. In reality it makes zero difference if nine million men look at a Muslim women without a covering or if none do. It’s all in the head and totally irrational. If a Muslim woman goes out without a covering she should still feel close to god and that her husband should love and respect her. If he won’t and god won’t without a covering that is the man and the religion imposing this on a woman. To even believe that you’re only special to your husband if no other man sees you harks back to that disgusting era of virgins being so important and pure and other women tainted. That’s my issue. And my Muslim friends only wear one through coercion and that makes me angry. Painting this idealised view of covering up is disingenuous “oh I’m so special my beauty is only for my husband and it’s all thanks to this big lump of fabric “ without it... you would be exactly the same.[/quote]
Not high (though I wish I was), my point IS, two wrongs don’t make a right.

Yes men/religion imposing on other women isn’t okay but neither is women doing the same thing.

Plenty of women on here feeling like they should be able to see more of other women’s body/face, despite other women telling them they would rather not and enjoy being covered (their reasons are irrelevant as is whether or not we agree with them)

@LastTrainEast

"you don’t hear an uproar that communication Has ceased" you don't hear it Linning - naturally you didn't, but in the real world it has been an issue since the mask wearing began. If you were interested you could find plenty of people having a problem with it on mumsnet and in the media.

There was a lot of concern for deaf people and even more for children if their teachers wore masks. Some people with autism found both wearing the mask and confronting people with masks difficult.

Concern is not the same as outrage.

The majority of people right now would dare request people take off their masks for obvious reasons and despite their concerns, make do.

That’s the point, that when confronted with a similar scenario but one we understand (vs the Niqab) we may have concerns but the great majority of us find ways around them and ways to address and respond to those concerns and adapt without requesting we outlaw the mask or attack people for wearing a mask.

Obviously I wouldn’t expect Niqabi women to work with deaf people or people with Autism if they were unwilling to take off their Niqab but I don’t think that’s an issue anyway.

Wouldn’t dare*

Yes I do find masks a hinderance.

I see many people pulling down their mask when talking

It does restrict communication.
It muffles the voice and hides facial expressions

Again, the fact that some women feel women should expose more of their body against their will

Their face. Not their bodies.

Men don’t cover their faces. Because it would hinder their participation in public life.

And that’s the point of the garment. To limit women’s participation in civic and public life.

Anything that infringes on daily life because of religion is ridiculous. I believe in God, but my belief is private, I don’t find it necessary to wear any symbols or badges of my faith for others to see. In fact religion is the cause of too much strife in the world. No religion is better than the other, and nobody should feel any superiority to others that aren’t of their religion. We are all the same.

I think the point is that even if you don't understand, don't agree, or wouldn't do something personally, this should not limit you to not respecting the freedom of choice and the way other people choose to live. Just as when you travel to countries where niqab and hijab is the normal thing in society and culture the people don't expect you to do the same and respect your choices and freedoms even if they don't understand why you choose to live that way. Respect works both ways and is much more important than understanding.

Amen to that and just to add why are some religions evidently so restrictive in human rights as to (gender segregated) attire and food consumption etc etc!!?? Is this discrimination by design default on another but acceptable level!?

Mind boggles as to why certain religions force discrimination on clothing freedoms or food products etc etc!

As I said it's not for you to understand its for you to respect. If you want to learn the reasons why there are plenty of resources on the Internet to read and learn

We most certainly should all respect other people’s religions. There’s often too much mockery on here. We don’t have to understand why other religions live the way they do., but I believe we should all keep our religions private.

@ResIpsaLoquiturInterAlia

Respect to all freedom of beliefs and religions as long as they (Islamic terrorists) cut out the ongoing attacks as in Reading just hours ago or seemingly Muslim against Muslim throughout parts of Middle East, West Asia and Africa etc on a daily basis.

Don’t need to know why certain religions have such rules and behaviours as long as it is not against innocent people who have nothing to do with it here in UK.

Religion should indeed be private and amongst your community (including being discriminatory segregated from mainstream society) not imposed onto the general public and hypothetically If unaligned and free to choose as a female I would perhaps avoid some and conversely as a male these seemingly appear beneficial in this discriminatory gender restrictive belief. Perhaps I am not wholly correct and generalised beyond the comfort level of super sensitive religious types. Not intentionally doing so but just speaking out loud in this friendly inquisitive discussion. No need to defend your private religions beliefs here.

Peace and respect to all apart from terrorist!

Islamist terrorists are that, terrorists, they aren’t Muslim (let alone representative of them) they aren’t following any religion, they are just hijacking one and making people believing they speak on behalf of a religion they aren’t even bothered to practice correctly.

I don’t think anyone would nor does support Terrorism here.

I think associating Islam with Terrorists is unfair, you don’t associate Christians with the KKK.

Muslims are not any more responsible for terrorist attacks than Christians are responsible for the KKK. Implying they have any sort of power over terrorism and whether or not terrorists commit those acts is highly questionable tbh.

Actually I don’t respect all religious beliefs

FGM is a religious belief by some Islamic scholars

For all the main religions homosexuality is a sin

And terrorists who commit their actions in the name of that religion are still Muslim or Christian (crusaders) and so on

Like the Catholic Priests that have abused children they are still catholic

Many people are brainwashed into thinking that they are acting on behalf of religion this has happened throughout history

If we want to cherry pick who is and who is not a Christian or Mulism or Hindu then really it should only be those that follow the religion to how it is meant to be followed and that is very few and never commit a sin, it would also mean that only good people are religious and only bad people are not

@EnthusiasmIsDisturbed

Actually I don’t respect all religious beliefs

FGM is a religious belief by some Islamic scholars

For all the main religions homosexuality is a sin

And terrorists who commit their actions in the name of that religion are still Muslim or Christian (crusaders) and so on

Like the Catholic Priests that have abused children they are still catholic

Many people are brainwashed into thinking that they are acting on behalf of religion this has happened throughout history

If we want to cherry pick who is and who is not a Christian or Mulism or Hindu then really it should only be those that follow the religion to how it is meant to be followed and that is very few and never commit a sin, it would also mean that only good people are religious and only bad people are not

I don’t agree with this view because like you say, plenty of things are wrong with religion.

Judging homosexuality as sinful for example,
the position of women (in both the Bible and Islam) etc... so even following the Bible and Islam to a T would be problematic, so people who followed it to the T wouldn’t necessarily be “good” but at least they would be following their religion.

I don’t think it’s fair to associate people who purposefully go AGAINST the religion they pretend to follow to the extremes (raping children, killing people) and be like “well they do say they are Christians” I do think to associate someone to a religion they need more than the label and should at least be following the basic Pillars of said religions.

The difference between Islamist terrorists and pedophile priests is that pedophile priests were continuously protected instead of chastitised by the religion even upon discovering their acts so in this case I do feel it would be fair to asssociate that religion with those problematic behaviors, in the case of Islamist terrorist, I have yet to see moderate Islamists who support and try to undermine how fucked up terrorism is. Most of the Muslim population is extremely quick to condemn them.

So I think being like “well too bad they said they were Muslim therefore they are Muslim” is unfair when they broke all the rules of Islam and caused extreme prejudice to the Muslim religion despite Muslims as a whole not supporting them.

FGM is a cultural practice unassociated with religion.

Not all major religions (or parts thereof) regard homosexuality as a sin, some have actively supported the fight for equal rights in marriage and daily life for homosexual people.

Islamist terrorists are that, terrorists, they aren’t Muslim

They are. You don’t get to decide who’s a Muslim and who’s not. All major religions have or have had radical elements, how else would they spread?

Many cultural practices have been incorporated into religion do you think that before religion came about people were living their lives in a completely different way

And some Islamic scholars do support FGM like it or not that’s why in some countries it has been so difficult to try and make illegal such is the influence of religious scholars

I have not said that a Muslim terrorist represents Muslims. But I do not go by the belief that if a religious person does something bad they are no longer that religion if they have down it in the name of religion or not. Catholic Priests have only very recently been condemned by the Catholic Church

As for religious terrorists being protected yes they have in all faiths they will always be those who have immense amount of wealth that equals power that will protect terrorists if they have the same beliefs and will pay people to do their dirty work - Bin Laden was very well protected

Just to add further that those who done wrong irrespective of religion is automatically some how according to true peaceful and non violent believers no any longer a representative of that religion!? Please tell that to the deceased British teacher’s surviving family.

In the eyes of people of other or no faith these extreme terrorist when shouting out their usual pre killing religious war chants (excuse ignorance on this as that Is what this appears and probably feels like to those like me who don’t know otherwise) that you as an innocent local non visually Muslim person is about to be stabbed because you are there at the wrong place wrong time minding your own business but not looking Muslim so indiscriminately killed for being there and being different.

In Reading if this teacher was black and wearing a body bag type hooded clothing (or as described by Boris I forget the description used) and all covered up would he have survived being discriminated against to be attacked and killed?!

Same reasoning for the North London attack a few days earlier from a person who appears to be a believer of another faith and not that of the attacker as again another innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time being attacked possibly because of fundamental extreme religious indoctrination? This appears to be motivated by extreme religious hate and different from the statistically more common black against black drug and gang knife crime culture that is often not reported these days unless the ethnicity differs between opposing parties.

Not blaming but just pointing out realities as there has been so many Muslim related hate killings in the UK in recent times so can’t “true” Muslim believers sort this out somehow as to non believers we cannot always distinguish between good and bad Muslims when most are obviously peaceful but a minority have factually proven to be dangerous to society at large?

Same for bad Catholic priests gone bad as no religious discrimination - wrong is wrong religious or not!

Linning everything you say is sexualising and politicising women's bodies.

I didn't care about muslim women wearing hijabs when they were just a headscarf, just a cultural garment. Clothes as a statement of political intent, an intent to be different to standard British culture - that makes it more tricky. Punks were like that, and I don't have a problem with them I know, not until/ unless they become aggressive. In the muslim case it carries a statement of submission to men and an overtone of judgement towards western women who don't wear it. I don't like that.

And to add to the acts of terrorism many view it as another form of war

Is the terrorist act carried out by a Palestinian an act of war against the Israeli government (in retaliation) or is it a terrorist act ? Just because they may have committed he crime alone with little or no warning is that different from bombs being dropped on a village by a government

Terrorism isn’t that cut a dry. Many will believe they are doing it for the right reason and religion is part of that.

The incident yesterday while the mans religious beliefs may have he believed driven him to to commit such a crime can this considered religious terrorism if he a lone wolf with mh issues

He still may have been a practising Muslim who just so happenes to be mentally ill