AIBU to think face coverings in public should be banned?

[OpheliaWasntMad]

Should all types of face covering in public be banned? I think they should. Mainly I’m concerned that people in balaclavas and face coverings are shoplifting and stealing phones etc with impunity.
People with balaclavas on marches look threatening and sinister.
Women with niqabs create a barrier between themselves and others as it’s hard to form connections if you can’t see someone’s facial expressions.
I think all face covering should be banned. It contributes to a society that feels more unsafe and divided.

Nobody here is arguing that face covering should be mandatory for women - in fact we already have laws in place that prosecute those who try to control how their partners dress. Coercive control is already illegal here.
it is incredibly naive to believe that all women who chose to vail their faces are doing so because they are forced into it.
Many women who chose to vail their faces do so because they have chosen to. And wether that choice is formed from religion or something else, it is still choice these women are entitled to make.
I think it's incredibly odd that some jewish women chose to shave off their own hair and replace it with a wig made from human hair. There is no logic to it. But I would never argue we should outlaw women shaving their head.
I also find it odd that Christians wear a cross, a literal sign of torturous murder, but again I would never think it should be outlawed.
I am shocked so many women here truly believe the goverment should be able to tell women how to dress in the name of freedom.

I always thought this until I met a lady who wore a niqab, she was captain of a rounders team I played against and was the most vocal, energetic and hilarious person on the field. We now see each other often and I soon realised, the only barrier her niqab caused was within me not her. I have since seen out and about in other settings such as the supermarket, I am able to recognise her by her eyes, walk and style. Ashamedly I never thought that would be possible as was in the camp of everybody looks the same wearing a niqab 😬

I’m sorry, but what we are talking about is something different, it’s about general interactions not someone you know well. I could be blind folded and still recognise my friends and know their reactions, a stranger or work colleague less so. It’s about general societal interactions.

it’s as culturally inappropriate in the UK as it would be to wear a crop top and daisy dukes in Afghanistan

But why have they chosen to wear a veil? Wearing a cross does not impact on anyone else any preventing full communication/identification for security.

People who commit those crimes will simply continue to commit them, with or without face coverings.

This is a commonly used type of claim to justify various things but utterly wrong imo.

They won’t continue to commit crimes if they get caught and put in prison because the witnesses identified them by their faces. I’m amazed you can’t deduce that.

More effective policing and harsher punishments are the solution.

How can you have effective policing if you can’t identify the criminals? Who do you punish?

Religious face coverings are not in line with Western values, we have tolerated them so far as they have been tiny in number but as that number grows, we need to take a firmer stance and look at the human rights issues they cause. Enabling women currently being coerced into wearing face coverings by giving them legal backing should be a good thing.

it is incredibly naive to believe that all women who chose to vail their faces are doing so because they are forced into it.

It is incredibly naive to believe that all women who choose to veil their faces do so without being forced into it.

Which scenario do you think is most likely, on probability?

a) women experiencing social pressure, conditioning from birth (their mother may be veiled for eg and some (only female) children get put in a hijab), coercion and even threats from misogynist men who have created a set of rules that says that if you don’t veil you are immodest and immodest women can be raped or abused (as illustrated by national advertising schemes in some countries)
or

b) a woman freely chooses to inconvenience and isolate herself by wearing a totally impractical face covering that compromises her vision and comfort (not to mention is REALLY difficult to eat in public while wearing - have you seen the videos?)

Ask yourself why it’s only the women and girls who are restricted and expected to hide themselves away.

Where does this end? In Afghanistan the men have decreed that women are now only allowed vision out of one eye when in public. Look it up.

You completely ignore my concerns about disabled people being excluded because of your views on religious dress.

Banning face coverings won't stop people using them to conceal their identity. If someone is willing to be violent and/or steal they will also be willing to ignore a ban on face coverings. So you will have excluded disabled people, and criminals will not be deterred.

If the police respond to an incident in good time they can detain people on the spot. It's only because this is no longer expected, but the public, by criminals, and by the police, that there is all this handwringing about being able to identify criminals on CCTV. If I were running a shop I would want the police to attend and arrest thieves/vandals - not try and track them down later on CCTV...

How will you fund the benefit bill for those of us currently in the work place but who will not be able to get there or participate safely if we are unable to wear a mask on the bus? There is a (not unreasonable, in my view) effort to improve disabled people's access to the work place to try and reduce the benefit bill, and making it harder for a not insubstantial number of people to go to work is really not going to help with this. And those determined to ignore any ban will do so regardless.

(FWIW I am no fan of covering the face for religious reasons, and I worry about women being coerced to do so. But forcing women to disrobe is just as coercive as forcing them to cover up.)

Several people have now mentioned hijabs whilst arguing about niqabs.

Are we banning those too? Because those aren't face coverings...

I’ve suffered the consequence of not covering my face in very cold weather. It wasn’t pretty. People kept asking if I’d fallen over and hit my chin because I had an open sore there. This was probably colder than anywhere in the UK (-20 in Banff) but the point stands that’s it’s not great for your skin.

We already have laws that stop women being forced to veil against their wishes! Coercive control falls under domestic abuse laws. Why take the choice away from all when the law already protects women who may be coerced into it.
That's like saying some women are coerced into having more children so from now it's illegal to have children.
It's ludicrous to suggest their free will to dress how they want to should be taken from them because some times men might influence their decisions.
Why do you believe the goverment has more rights to dictate a woman's clothing choices than the woman herself?

I can't tell you why all these women chose to wear it because I haven't talk to all these women to ask them, have you?

We don't live in a society that needs identification at all times. When was the last time you had to prove your identy to walk into tescos or take your kids to soft play?

Do you really want a society where the goverment control how women dress? Does that really sound less oppressive to women?

How about we let women chose their own style choices and support laws that prosecute coercive control to protect all women from men who think they should have control over our every day decisions

Hilarious that you've equated living in Scotland with living so remotely that the PP doesn't know what an urban area is like 😂

In this densely populated Scottish city where I live, I don't feel compelled to be available to "make connections" with anyone who feels entitled to do so. I also feel very entitled to pull my scarf up over my face to keep warm, because why should I be cold just to facilitate your comfort?

Perhaps we should mandate a maximum fringe length in order that faces not be obscured beyond the level you deem appropriate? Or set parameters around the wearing of sunglasses (small ones, obviously, lest they make connections difficult) only when the cloud cover is reduced to a prescribed lever?

When it was just a few women… it was a bit of an oddity but live and let live. But the rapid increase of full covering does feel uncomfortable.

I have posted this before, but there was a child in dd’s class who started wearing a full covering (not just headscarf) in yr 5. Face covered and long dress including thick sort of leggings as well. Obviously excused from PE etc. Her dm wore a kind of leather mask with mesh over the eyes. Sorry not sorry but that was creepy. Imagine getting decked out in that before the school run.

I think the French have got it right in regards to religious facial coverings.
Ditto balaclavas and masks outwith an appropriate setting.
I'd be happy to see them banned.

No, I pointed out that it should not be accepted for young children to wear hijabs, especially in school because if the safeguarding issue it creates. As per the terrible murder of Sara Sharif, her hijab was reportedly used to cover some injuries.

It is divisive and there have also been reports of bullying of non hijab wearing Muslim children in higher population Muslim areas.

You completely ignore my concerns about disabled people being excluded because of your views on religious dress.

Correction. My views on face coverings .

I was talking about the criminal/social aspects, I believe other PPs have made workable suggestion around disability provision - obviously I don’t want people who need to wear a mask for specific health reasons to suffer but that is not my problem to solve. That is a problem for the legions of legal experts employed by the government.

that there is all this handwringing about being able to identify criminals on CCTV. If I were running a shop I would want the police to attend and arrest thieves/vandals - not try and track them down later on CCTV...

But until we get to this wonderful state where we have an abundance of policeman doing their job, surely a Face ID on cctv is better than nothing? If a group of criminals are determined to wear their masks or as sometimes happens, they utilise niqabs to conceal their faces, then they will stand out and be far easier to track and bar from entry if there aren’t lots of others around in masks, balaclavas (according to PPs this suddenly seems like a popular fashion item for non criminals) or niqabs.

How will you fund the benefit bill for those of us currently in the work place but who will not be able to get there or participate safely if we are unable to wear a mask on the bus?

Your unnecessary hyperbole has been addressed.

I can't tell you why all these women chose to wear it because I haven't talk to all these women to ask them, have you?

Some women are definitely coerced into wearing face coverings. The previously mentioned rules created by some men force it. Thing is, you can’t tell which ones they are.

We don't live in a society that needs identification at all times.

We pretty much do. Especially in places like London where you can’t get into even some supermarkets without proving your id.

Do you really want a society where the goverment control how women dress? Does that really sound less oppressive to women?

We already do. There are laws on public decency. We also need to be able to spot abusive behaviour and being made to wear a niqab is just another way of isolating women.

Do you have any concern for the young non English speaking brides trafficked over here and further isolated by face coverings where everyone turns a blind eye and congratulated themselves on how ‘progressive’ and ‘open minded’ they are?

I think this is over simplified. I work with a number of young women who chose to wear niqab. All are living independently, all are in education and none are impacted by community pressure as the majority in their social circle wear hijab at most. They look at it as taking away any pressure to look a certain way, they feel they aren't reduced to their appearance or over sexualised as women and they feel it strengthens their faith. All are pretty feminist leaning and left countries of origin to escape extremism and oppression of women. They fully support their friends who no longer wear any covering at all.

Obviously in some cases it is done out of oppression, but not always. Removing womens choices in how they dress is never moving women forward.

It's not hyperbole, and it has not been addressed.

I currently work. If I am unable to get to work or participate in the workplace I will need to claim benefits. This is not hypothetical.

(See also my previous posts about having already been assaulted on the bus for the "crime" of sitting quietly wearing a mask. Some people get very angry about other people getting on with their lives and taking measures to maintain their health.)

No one has made any kind of suggestion for how disabled people who need to wear a mask may access public services when there is a face covering ban.

Someone suggested there should be "medical exemptions" but no one has any credible suggestions for how this will work.

One poster suggested state issued masks, which is frankly sinister. It has not worked well in the past when one group of people is required to be publicly labelled...

Unless there is a sensible suggestion for how disabled people can be accommodated a face covering ban will not do anything other than exclude disabled people (and those that care for them and/or live with them).

Of course, we could just allow people to wear medical grade masks if they need them, without all the nonsense about "medical exemptions". This is the current status quo.

Injuries in children have been cleverly concealed by 'Western' clothing. In the case of baby p bruising was concealed by chocolate smears. Parents who want to hide abuse will find ways to do it irregardless of what their children wear. I grew up in a very Conservative Christian home and we were always expected to dress very modestly. There are many other ways to spot abuse of children and those were missed in that particular case. Home schooling is more of a concern than use of hijab.

"We don't live in a society that needs identification at all times.

We pretty much do. Especially in places like London where you can’t get into even some supermarkets without proving your id."

What nonsense. I've lived in London for 40 years and have not even once been asked for my ID when going to the supermarket (whilst wearing a mask).

(And it has been far too long since I've been asked to prove my age when buying wine!)

Some women are definitely coerced into wearing face coverings
And that is already illegal, coercive control comes under domestic abuse rules. Why do we need a new law that takes the option away from all when the scenario you mentioned is already illegal?

Wearing a headscarf to signify devotion - fine. But covering the whole face and body for the “sexualised” reason - not acceptable. Children should not be covered up to protect them from a man’s gaze. They’re children! And what about older women? I can tell you no one is ogling me.

Obviously in some cases it is done out of oppression, but not always. Removing womens choices in how they dress is never moving women forward.

I’m not overly convinced by the claim that some women wear these face coverings in a feminist way but ok. Voluntarily adopting a mode of dress used throughout the world as a means of oppressing millions of women seems insensitive at best.

I guess the bigger question is, is it ok for some women to be oppressed and forced to wear face coverings in order for other women to exercise freedom of choice to wear face coverings?

If we take away the option of face coverings like they have done in some European countries, it has a minor limitation on freedom of choice for some but a major impact in reducing the oppression of others, even in the unlikely scenario that they are the minority.

Which group are more important? And why do so many people argue in favour of such a powerful international symbol of the oppression of women? I’m sure the vast majority of women in Afghanistan would LOVE to be allowed to step outside the house on their own and see unimpeded through both eyes and feel the wind in their hair and the sun on their face. Is there no sympathy for them?

I see it more as Western society removing a tool of oppression of women.

Oh that’s strange, my dd couldn’t get into a Sainsbury’s without tapping her loyalty card.

Many shops and supermarkets are phasing out cash altogether, making all transactions traceable. Are you sure you just haven’t noticed the erosion of our privacy? Try watching the series Hunted to understand what the authorities regularly use already to track our movements.

Maybe you could recommend some id/tracking free shopping spots?