Danish ban on the burqa comes into effect today

[placemats]

The argument for and against seems to be

either: 'Strongly oppressive'

or: 'Discriminatory'

What's the difference between these two? Personally I welcome the ban.

www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/01/danish-burqa-ban-comes-into-effect-amid-protests

Where is the limit to any government dictating women's garb? Is it just burqua?
Festival masks are not uncommon and yet they would appear to be in violation of a law prohibiting covering the face.

I am quibbling out of ignorance.

Lass

I look at her eyes. She says hello. Her eyes move in the way eyes do when one smiles

You know.... smiling

Funny you should ask though. I do have X ray vision. With my X ray vision I can see the harm cigarettes do inside people's bodies.

I am trying to disarm with humour

Can't help but feel this is more to do with the rise of the right that freeing up women from oppression. OK through their conditioning they may wear it, unless I see the research that evidences that the women who will be most affected by this are agreeable I will believe that it's repressive. More thugs will feel entitled to target groups who refuse to comply. It's not good however you spin it

Your neighbour is sending out a visible signal to the world and her daughters that she thinks women must cover up and be modest. I'm not interested in how lovely her cooking and smiling might be given how offensive I find that notion.

Where is the limit to any government dictating women's garb? Is it just burqua?

The government already sets limits on how people are permitted to present in public - that's why you're not allowed to stroll around the streets naked.

WRT to other dress, I think the limit should be burqa/other face coverings, yes. This isn't about wanting to restrict religious freedom or freedom of expression. It's based on the same principle that says it's not OK to get about in public with your genitals out - covering one's face violates social norms, can present a security risk, and creeps everyone else out, to put it bluntly. That isn't because of prejudice against Muslims. It's because of deeply rooted evolved instincts around how we recognise, assess and relate to one another as human animals.

The reason we feel instinctively creeped out when we see a faceless person (whether they are wearing a burqa or a balaclava) is because the face is so basic and fundamental to human social interaction and risk assessment.

It really doesn't creep everyone out. I do understand a rejection of what you assume it represents on a societal level.
But you can't assume what it means to that individual. I am quite prepared to have friendly interactions with people with whom I disagree as long as they aren't foisting it on me. I think it's interesting that she has chosen that - her own mother doesn't wear the niqab; nor does her grandmother. Maybe one day I'll get beyond pleasantries and ask her how it came about.

And if you are offended by that I don't know why you aren't more offended by ultra orthodox Jews, who have no interest in interacting with the wider community and who also cover up in ways which are impractical and restrictive.

Are there any Jewish sects which require faces to be covered up?

Ok. I see you want to only talk about faces and I have attempted to show that it's possible to interact without being creeped out and still being able to communicate.

Transplants, you keep changing the subject back to religious clothing in general, when the point has been repeatedly made that it's about face covering specifically.

HollowTalk - re "I really wish it could be banned, but it would just create more problems overnight. This is exactly what happened in France and female students were immediately pulled out of school and not allowed out of the house. Before, they could get an education; now they can't."

Who are these girls? Can you point me in the direction of these stories?

Er, no actually I don't. I think I've covered all the bases I wanted to cover. If you pardon the pun. If you read all my answers. And the answers which I've agreed with; like Maisy's.

Off now. Respectfully, I am not in the mood for a heated debate just at the moment

Lass - in my work I come into contact with many women who wear the niqab. I just don't see it after first introductions - anymore than any other item of clothing or piercings or blue hair or whatever . They are just themselves, and as worthwhile getting to know and communicate with and laugh with as anyone else.

Just to prove you're not wildly unpopular well said hearmyvoice. There are many perspectives to this, I'm not sure they've all been explored.

Donkey

“The reason we feel instinctively creeped out when we see a faceless person (whether they are wearing a burqa or a balaclava) is because the face is so basic and fundamental to human social interaction and risk assessment.”

Yes but there is also more to it. I feel creeped out when I see an outward expression of shame in one’s appearance, that a woman’s face must be hidden from view, that it’s public showing is offensive or sexual. This flies in the face of all my values and the values of our own culture where women were oppressed some time ago but now have many freedoms.

TransplantsArePlants

Ok. I see you want to only talk about faces and I have attempted to show that it's possible to interact without being creeped out and still being able to communicate

If that post is directed to me do not put words in my mouth or twist what I said. I said nothing about creepy, creeped out.

They are just themselves, and as worthwhile getting to know and communicate with and laugh with as anyone else

Really? If they were say hardline Ulster Protestants opposed to abortion or same sex marriage I should make the effort to get to know them?

I find the concept that a woman's face cannot be seen in public deeply offensive. I have nothing in common with any woman who thinks that it is acceptable.

I'm on the fence as well. I know from experience that communicating with somebody wearing a niqab can be tricky, especially in a loud place or if they have an accent — I struggle enough with some accents when I can see their lips moving! And it is a lot harder to read cues when both the face and the body are covered.

On the other hand it's taking a choice away.

I'm not sure that it's really comparable to nuns — the ones around here wear skirts and cardis most of the time, although obviously they wear a wimple. The habit is more like a "dress uniform" I suppose. And their faces aren't covered of course.

Lass

The creeped out comment was to Donkey, as she said it just above my post

The bit about not being able to communicate and not being able to see a smile was to you

I have no intention of putting words in your mouth and I am sorry if my lazy lack of bolding who exactly I was talking to has led to that.

I do not see the point of banning the miqab or burka except in certain situation as Maisy said. Nor do I see any advantage in refusing to interact with people around me.

Also, Lass

I am generally interested what you have to say though I don't share the "heat" of emotion about it, and want to to tell you that I have no interest in twisting words. Thats not me.

On the other hand it's taking a choice away.

I suppose the Nordic Model is taking a choice away for sex workers?

I suppose pornography is empowering for women?

For the avoidance of doubt I support neither prostitution or pornography.

Wearing the burqa or niqab is a practice by ultra right wing religious zealots who think nothing of hanging/executing gay people and stoning women to death for adultery. Presumably with smiling eyes.

I was the one who used creeped out. I knew it was strong language and I used it deliberately instead of something softer because I wanted to emphasise the importance of instinct; of physiological response. It is a human instinct to have a physiological response of alarm, danger (even if only registered subconsciously) when you encounter a stranger who is covering their face. Gavin DeBecker in The Gift of Fear talks about the instinctive, split-second assessments that we are doing whenever we meet a new person, and how much this depends on their face, especially the interplay between eyes and mouth (e.g., smiling mouth with non-smiling eyes is a combo that signals deception/danger). Most of us are unaware that we are doing this.

Anyhow, the reason I'm pointing this out has to do with my main reason for supporting a niqab/burqa ban, which is that it is fundamentally antisocial. It is antisocial to refuse to show your face to others, this is why I support the state intervening where this becomes a trend. I know that other posters have different reasons for objecting to it. It's sexist too, obviously, and women have every right to feel disturbed by implications of it in that respect as well.

I'd be firmly against people wearing masks in public anyway and for that reason alone the full covering should be illegal.
It is also oppressive and if preventing women from carrying their prison with them when they go out means that they are kept in a prison at home that's a reason to sort out that prison too.

It's not just you who are creeped out with it donkey I am too. A law preventing face covering in public (except for reasons of safety) would get my support. I think genitals covered / face on show are reasonable constraints on the freedom of the individual even in a liberal society.