The Veil Debate

[boschy]

Forgive me if this has been done elsewhere, but I havent seen it.

So, there is this big debate at the moment about where/when/if women should wear the veil. Leaving aside the relious obligation, which doesn't seem entirely clear to me, I think there are other criteria involved.

For me, it seems that if wearing a full or partial veil obscures the wearer's face, there are certain situtations where it should not be allowed - for example, if you are in court on trial or as a witness; or as a teacher; or giving care (nursing/care homes etc) where those receiving the care would expect full face contact in order to fully understand facial expression, lip movement etc.

If, as an adult woman, you choose to wear the veil for most of your normal day to day interactions - then that's your choice. But in the situations I outline above, I don't think it's appropriate. Am I wrong?

[Shnickshnack]

What I mean is that there are social norms with regards to how people dress and hiding your face breaks social norms in a Western context.

Maybe if you live in a society where all or most women wear Burkas it is not as bad because they will socialise with their family and female friends and take off their veils in the privacy of their homes. But here in the UK, I doubt that a woman wearing a Burka (say a mum of my DC's class mate) would come to my home and take off her veil.

I know this sounds very very intolerant and I don't feel comfortable saying it but I feel uneasy that my DCs go to the same school as children whose mums wear Burkas. I know this sounds awful but that is how I feel although (or maybe especially as) I come from a Muslim family.

[nicename]

My family is from Iran. They do not cover their faces there. They are muslims. Women who cover faces are usually foreigners of seen as a bit fanatical. If I covered my face I would be copying another cultural norm, not a following religious dictate.

Country is not religion.

Some people may feel the need to 'wear the badge' but I don't believe that you need to copy clothes from another culture to 'belong' to the gang.

[nicename]

I meant 'women who cover their faces there...' ie in Iran.

[ErrolTheDragon]

Hiding away one's face behind a mask takes a little bit of humanity away, not only from the wearer but also from the those who are looking.

sad that's how people think. I don't agree.

I find it quite bizarre that you can't trust a person if you've not seen them. Maybe I'm unusual because I know quite a lot of people well who I've never seen.

How would you feel about a mum on the school run dressed in nothing else but underwear and sunglasses (opposite extreme of wearing a burka)? Would you say 'oh it's her choice, never mind how others feel' or would you feel uncomfortable about it?

I'd find it highly eccentric! The more likely scenarios are nightclothes (slovenly MNer, it happens apparently) or hotpants and small top... wouldn't be bothered by those. Certainly not bothered by sunglasses.

[ErrolTheDragon]

what is religious about traditional pakistani menswear (apart from the hat)?

nothing afaik. not sure what the relevance is either way.

[oohdaddypig]

I feel it is a very odd thing to cover your face, whatever your reasons for doing so. We use our mouths to speak and our noses to breath. Our expressions communicate more than any spoken language.

I can't therefore see why anyone would choose to cover their face when it is so impractical. I find this conversation fascinating as a result.

It does segregate you from the outside world because others cannot properly communicate with you. We are all social creatures after all.

Of course this is a religious debate, but as no religion actually requires it, it's an odd thing to choose To do IMHO. .

[ErrolTheDragon]

I think its odd too...but people do all sorts of odd things.

Not quite 'for whatever reason' - if we had an outbreak of something like SARs you might find that not wearing a mask was the antisocial thing and not odd at all.

[oohdaddypig]

I found the masks worn during SARS very sinister looking tbh, for the same reason. I appreciated they might be a necessity for some people, but covering one's mouth could never be something you would choose to do, by itself.

[78bunion]

If there is somethnig so awful about men from the middle east that unlike the rest of the world they will want to rape women if they see their hair, never mind their faces then those men need therapy or to be confined to the house (not impose restrictions on women's clothing). The Koran says men and women should dress modestly. It does not require women even to cover their head and plenty of Muslim women do not wear a headscarf.

[nicename]

Dressing modestly - ok that means cover our bits and don't flash your bling. Fair enough. Most religions will say that.

Covering the face is as cultural thing that goes waaaaay back before the birth is Islam.

[Wannabestepfordwife]

I take on board that the numbers of niquab wearers are the same but it seems that those who do wear them seem to be in concentrated areas.

My da lives in Oman has lived in Egypt, Pakistan, Abu Dhabi and Dubai and she's worked in Libya, quatar and Yemen but she was surprised by the number of women covering their face in Luton.

I think for a lot of people finding people in mass in a different dress to themselves makes them feel uncomftable and vulnerable so I can understand how the veil wearers feel.

It seems to me it's mostly British Muslims adopting their faced been covered not immigrants and I wonder why that is

[ErrolTheDragon]

Well, for one thing people who convert to a faith in adulthood are probably more likely to be - in one way or another - more extreme and dedicated about it.

[Wannabestepfordwife]

I hadn't thought of that errol I just wondered if it was because some western girls are following Rhianna, lady gagas lead in becoming over sexualised in their dressed it was making some Muslim girls want to be more conservative.

[ErrolTheDragon]

Covering the face is as cultural thing that goes waaaaay back before the birth is Islam.

yes... I just started googling and found stuff about Jewish women covering the lower part of their face and I Corinthians 11:2-16 ... and then there's the bridal veil, over the face to signify virginity apparently ....

[nicename]

But there is no one 'thing'. There isn't a uniform or something. It's not like joining the brownies.

I do agree with you about converts and born-agains. Lovely as some are, there are those who are rather scary in their zeal - they act/talk as if they have discovered the secret of eternal happiness and you are just going to hell anyway.

[ErrolTheDragon]

wannabe - that's also part of it; and sadly also the increase in objectification of women/porn etc.

[78bunion]

Converts are always the worst in all religions. Same for born again Christians or Catholics.

[AdventureTed]

The veil is about controlling women and treating them as some fella's property - like they hide their wallets to stop them getting nicked.

[nicename]

Ah, the virginal veil. Don't belly dancers wear them too (or is that Hollywood?).

[nicename]

78 - that was what I was trying tactfully not to say!

There's nothing worse than a smug bornagain/convert. They know it all, and tend to pick out the most fire and brimstone aspects too.

[grimbletart]

Jolly handy for covering up bruises too. Sorry it's a Daily Hate link but it is a court case so reasonably accurate I hope.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2434803/Muslim-Jubel-Miah-terrorised-wife-wearing-veil-said-wanted-to-college.html

Apparently she chose to wear the veil. Why? To try and placate her husband. He got 16 weeks in clink, so out in 8. Tells you how women are valued doesn't it, even in good old UK?

This sentence should be appealed to get it increased. They didn't even give the nobber the full sentence allowed - six months.

[nicename]

Blackberry fail so I couldn't see it all. Was he a convert? Such a devout 'man' surely shouldn't be taking/dealing drugs, no?

Bastards come in all shapes, sizes, colours and religions.

[ErrolTheDragon]

No, not a convert. A wife-abuser. He should have had a much longer sentence, no question. I can't imagine why the judge didn't give him the max term (still only 6 months).

'After the case Rachel Horman, head of the domestic violence division at law firm Watson Ramsbottom, said: ‘The sentence is an insult to the victim and people will view the punishment as a slap on the wrist.

‘There has been a prolonged 12-month ordeal, so why was only one charge brought? It’s absolutely shocking and it makes me really angry.

‘If this was an attack by a stranger in the street, I can guarantee it would have been a different story. Domestic violence is often under-sentenced and too much blame is given to the victims.’

Why is it still not recognised that 'domestic violence' is often far worse - sustained brutality.

[nicename]

Bastard wife-beater. Lowest of the low (just about).

Why is there such a low sentence for assaulting your spouse? Is the fact that you live with your attacker taken into account? It's as if its partly the victims fault for marrying them. You certainly would get longer if you attacked a stranger.

I hope to god she changes the locks when he's inside and gets a court order against him to keep at least 100 miles away from her.

[ErrolTheDragon]

nice - 'He was also given an indefinite restraining order to keep him away from the victim'. Hope he obeys it but if he doesn't that he gets the book (a heavy one) thrown at him.