[Closed] Muslim Folks: help me defeat this xenophobic nonsense

going back to the OP, if the implication from the image is that one might be 'scary' or a 'terrorist', as a resident of the good old united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, I know which I'd think would be more likely to be bombing innocent civilians 😯

(little bit of politics for ya!)

I'm all for religion of all kinds being gone so my position is probably not going to find any common ground with any religious teaching TBH. Not much point in arguing degrees of oppression as I think the whole thing is a crock. I know a line when I'm sold it. Perhaps you can tell me the modest Muslim line on Apostasy?

Given that all religions are based on works of fiction written at various times in the past then I don't think any religion should be able to claim special cases as to how they dress.

I explained why I posted it up

You made some nonsensical statement about locking your door (I think it might have been what you commonly refer to as a straw man) was that your explanation?

And it says quite clearly that they should cover up "so as not to be annoyed" who do you think is doing the annoying if not men? Maybe mountain weasels?

chrismac - Member

Given that all religions are based on works of fiction written at various times in the past then I don't think any religion should be able to claim special cases as to how they dress.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14135523 ]Wot, not even Pastafarians??[/url]

OP - apologies for arriving late but in the interests of security, e.g, identification on passports and other such documents, airport-security etc, what is the difference in those head-coverings in your OP? Not being funny, just interested.

JY. Re the matter of dispute, the BBC religion website goes through the dispute quite well both in terms of what the prophet said and how this should be applied in Islamic and secular societies. So IMO, yes, still a matter of debate/dispute.

DenDennis - Member

going back to the OP, if the implication from the image is that one might be 'scary' or a 'terrorist', as a resident of the good old united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, I know which I'd think would be more likely to be bombing innocent civilians

(little bit of politics for ya!)

Simple really ...

1. For security reason we need to check the person to confirm who they say they are so we need to see their face.

2. For security reason we need to make sure they are not bank robbers etc ...

3. Regardless of religion there is no Muslamic Kingdom in the UK in the past and the closest was in Southern Spain long time ago. So this community does not need to comply with their way of life but as liberals we are just accommodating them out of respect. Give a person an inch s/he will want a mile if s/he is not the understanding type. As for our past empire that's different story because our guns and ammo are stronger.

Therefore, can I wear my mankini now? 🙄

You made some nonsensical statement about locking your door (I think it might have been what you commonly refer to as a straw man) was that your explanation?

annoyed

he BBC religion website goes through the dispute quite well both in terms of what the prophet said and how this should be applied in Islamic and secular societies

LINKY?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/beliefs/niqab_1.shtml

this is about whether it should be veil or Full covering - I agree there is some debate on that issue of exactly what should be covered and it ranges. I know a [small minority] of muslim women who wear neither for example.

Read the whole link (!) it's more than just that.

going back to the OP, if the implication from the image is that one might be 'scary' or a 'terrorist', as a resident of the good old united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, I know which I'd think would be more likely to be bombing innocent civilians

So you think one of those in the OP is more likely than the other to bomb innocents...How come?

It's quite right that we should tolerate religious beliefs and customs in the interests of integration, even when they contradict established laws, customs, security or social norms. After all, a western woman would be perfectly fine walking around an Islamic country wearing a bikini.

... Oh.

My view is that it is pointless to question their religion/view as you have no rights to do so and you can't change their rules or way of life.

It is for their women to fight back or to stand up to them rather than letting outsiders intervene in their way of life/community/world.

Utter Piffle; we should rightly question any abuse of power or influence, regardless of how that power or influence is gained e.g. a husband over his wife or a priest over his flock.

However, I will concede that it is correct that people should be able to dress how they want and it is also true as alluded to that some women say they choose to wear a face veil. My argument is that whilst I can choose to wear an orange jumpsuit and handcuffs, why would I dress in a way that usually signifies some of my rights have been taken away from me - there really is nothing in the Koran that says they [i]have to[/i] cover their faces.

With regards to your second point that if the women are oppressed they should be left to fight back themselves without support, I strongly disagree. You only need to do a bit of reading on forced marriages, acid attacks, and FGM to realise that there are severe problems with women's rights in several UK communities that do need outside help and support to banish. Whilst perhaps on its own the full face veil isn't quite the same as those examples it is a form of misogynistic oppression/control all the same.

 

You claimed the reason for the dress code and I gave you the quotes from the Koran
Pray explain how that is a straw man

Well as you well know I was referring to this "explanation"

Its not this at all anymore than me lockingmmy door when I go in my house says that every person outside is a scary robber.

The clue was actually in the paragraph that you then quoted, you know the bit about a nonsensical statement about locking your door.(I guess you didn't bother reading it).

Well your poor arguments annoyed me - does this mean you have enraged me with lust ?

And now a straw man and an ad hominem in one sentence.

Cougar - Moderator

After all, a western woman would be perfectly fine walking around an Islamic country wearing a bikini.

... Oh.

Are bikinis banned in Turkey then ? Or is that the wrong sort of Islamic country - did you perhaps mean Saudi Arabia ?

Do you think our attitudes should reflect Saudi attitudes ? It would be remarkable if you did imo.

Don't be obtuse.

The point I was getting at in what I thought was a mildly humorous manner was that there should be balance. Either when one is in a given country one abides by its established customs, or one is free to ignore them and practice their own beliefs. Superficially I don't overly care which one we pick so long as we all pick the same one and agree to it.

When as a nation we're expected to both allow people to do what they like irrespective of established social norms [i]and[/i] also throw away our own personal belief systems when we visit other countries, we have an imbalance. Pick one, you can't have it both ways. Is it correct for a country to allow people freedom of choice even if that choice is a symbol of oppression generally incompatible with established conventions, or is it correct for a country to expect all citizens and visitors there to abide by the rules of that country?

I don't have the answer to that question, there's pros and cons to both (though I'd like to think that we've mostly got it right here). But whilst that disparity exists, then racist horseshit fiction like the image in the OP will flourish.

Which is a shame.

And now a straw man and an ad hominem in one sentence.

it's a religious instruction to cover up so that men don't become enraged with lust.

Anyway its clear the koran does not say dress like that to stop men being enraged with lust and you can, rather ironically, fallaciously throw around fallacies or just conceed that point. I think we have established which you are going to do.
That claim is wrong however much you wish to do this to death.

When as a nation we're expected to both allow people to do what they like irrespective of established social norms and also throw away our own personal belief systems when we visit other countries, we have an imbalance. Pick one, you can't have it both way

It depends on how important the particular custom is. For a woman to voluntary wear a veil here is not a big deal. Not many people care either way what strangers are wearing - we don't abide by religious rules or social norms that prevent it. However in Middle Eastern countries it IS a big deal, by their standards, to go around uncovered.

I think it better to take each situation as it comes, rather than make blanket rules.

Don't be obtuse.

Oh I'm sorry, please accept my apologies. As for your waffle after that and your "I don't have the answer to that question" dilemma, my position is very clear - I believe in both religious freedom and the right of people to choose their own life style choices without interference from me or anyone else. And I couldn't give a toss what they do in other countries with respect to what we should do here in the UK.

Junkyard - lazarus

The dispute exists mainly for the non Muslim IME though I am far from an expert on it

Nah, it's been a hot topic in islam for centuries.- different sects have different takes on it, some place it in different context than others too (I had to go and look it up but Maliki sunni don't consider the face and hands to be intimate parts, frinstance.)

When as a nation we're expected to both allow people to do what they like irrespective of established social norms and also throw away our own personal belief systems when we visit other countries, we have an imbalance. Pick one, you can't have it both ways.

The reality is that western liberal tolerance means, much like freedom of speech, we need to defend it most when folk do things we disapprove of. Its their choice not ours.
You cannot say you cannot force women to dress like this you can only force them to dress like the way we approve of and think it makes sense as a position and it is freedom.

Not many people care either way what strangers are wearing

I suspect that given a choice, more people than "not many" would choose to have face-to-face interactions with people actually face to face. But like you I'm speculating.

As for your waffle

You really are unable to have a discussion without resorting to insults, aren't you.

couldn't give a toss what they do in other countries

Good for you. I on the other hand am quite concerned about systematic oppression in other countries.

@ Northwind

It amounts to the same as "dirty slag, dressing like that, she's asking for it". But it can equally be translated to mean more or less "If you dress respectably and as a woman of faith you will be recognised and treated as such". It's a matter of much dispute

Cougar - Moderator

After all, a western woman would be perfectly fine walking around an Islamic country wearing a bikini.

... Oh.

How about men wearing mankini or tiny budgie smuggler? 😆

couldn't give a toss what they do in other countries

Good for you. I on the other hand am quite concerned about oppression in other countries.

Oh nice one ..... you deliberately edit my comment to create the impression that I am making a completely different point.

Shall we have the unedited version ?

"[i]And I couldn't give a toss what they do in other countries [b]with respect to what we should do here in the UK.[/i][/b]"

You really are unable to have a discussion without resorting to insults, aren't you.

Because of course you calling me obtuse was designed as a compliment ?

So you accusing me of being obtuse is fine, but me accusing you of waffling is an insult 🙄

People can wear what they want it has nothing to do with me or my tastes or preferences.
it's not a fashion statement, it's a religious instruction to cover up so that men don't become enraged with lust. There is just no escaping that it is an example of misogyny in religion

Rather ot (but there's a lack of liberalism here at the moment)
But you want to see a misogynistic culture? Go and have a look at the everyday sexism project. I'm amazed more women don't dress like that with the rabid animals that there are on our streets.

Oh, I can't be bothered. I'm going to bed, I'll pick this up on page 12 in the morning.

There is an issue, and I'm not sure how to explain it without bringing the PC tribe down on my head, with the way that people emigrate into a liberal, hopefully less overtly sexist culture (although see the above...) yet persist in maintaining cultural traditions which are less liberal and more overtly sexist.

It probably centres around the idea of integration, although I don't think any ethnic or cultural group integrates fully without losing their identity.

I know 2 women who refused the idea of an arranged marriage and have had to involve the police at various times to protect them from their families. I think if you choose to move to live in a country, you have to accept that traditions will change over time and over generations.

Ernie most threads I see you on someone makes that same point to you.

Its a shame you , mainly, just do this these days

crikey it is difficult for any person to integrate and how we accommodate this [ both sides] is a difficult balancing act. There will be give and take on both sides though the extremes of either side dont want to budge.
Perhaps we accept the veil and they stop arranged/forced* marriage and so called honour killings???? It may take more than one generation though.

* i know they are not the same thing and should not be interchanged

It's quite right that we should tolerate religious beliefs and customs in the interests of integration, even when they contradict established laws, customs, security or social norms. After all, a western woman would be perfectly fine walking around an Islamic country wearing a bikini.
... Oh.

This is a very troll-ish/borderline bigoted thing for a moderator to be posting...

Mind you, one of the other moderators has decided he will carry on using the term 'chinky' despite having had it pointed out that it might be offensive/racist.

But you can see why they banned TJ. 😕

Just leave Muslin women alone. It's absolutely normal that they want to be covered from head to toe in black blankets to prevent men from being tempted into adultery or rape (that is then blamed on the women regardless).

You want to refuse them a choice to liberate them.

But only an idiot (or a painfully liberal "progressive" one) would see this as anything other than oppression and misogyny at work. You should look at the real reasons behind this and not half arsed examples of women who "choose" to cover their faces. After all if I gave you an example of a ****stani who thinks its funny and acceptable to be called a "****" by his mates then you would be rightly horrified.
You should extend the same indignation to women here and abroad.

is it correct for a country to expect all citizens and visitors there to abide by the rules of that country?

But the veil [b]is [/b]state interference. It's applied by theocratic states abroad and has been brought here by people from those countries. The veil has no place in British society it's completely counter to what we believe about the rights of women and so forth. Just because the thing is the accepted norm in some societies doesn't mean we should accept it here. The veil is not about personal choice it's an insidious device for the oppression of some muslim women.

But the veil is state interference. It's applied by theocratic states abroad and has been brought here by people from those countries. The veil has no place in British society it's completely counter to what we believe about the rights of women and so forth. Just because the thing is the accepted norm in some societies doesn't mean we should accept it here. The veil is not about personal choice it's an insidious device for the oppression of some muslim women.

On the flip side, our tolerance and acceptance of other cultures is what allows us to rise above those theocratic, oppressive states and cultures???

Or, to put it more bluntly, mind yer own farking business.

Well I think the UK has developed by doing the exact opposite. Confronting oppression and brutality where it sees fit. Not by burying its head in the sand and ignoring the ill treatment of others.
Interesting interpretation of history yo have there.

As a group we need to decide what we find acceptable and legislate accordingly. For example FGM is a societal norm in many places yet we do not allow it here. The veil is certainly less emotive and clear cut than FGM but I believe is equally deserving of attention. What would the outcome of a ban actually be I wonder? What happened in France after their ban? Being accepting doesn't mean accepting things we know to be crap.

Well I think the UK has developed by doing the exact opposite. Confronting oppression and brutality where it sees fit. Not by burying its head in the sand and ignoring the ill treatment of others. Interesting interpretation of history yo have there.

Blimey, said without a trace of irony! 😯

This is a very troll-ish/borderline bigoted thing for a moderator to be posting...

I've made this clear in other threads, but generally I'm posting in my capacity as a forum user, not a moderator. I don't really see how that's relevant (other than as a tool to throw stones at me); unless you're suggesting that in my position as moderator I waive the right to have an opinion or take part in debates.

Arguably I should be setting an example but, meh. (-:

So, after 4 pages have any Muslim folk chipped in to defeat this xenophobic nonsense?

Elaborating a little on what I said before (now I'm awake),

Ernie used examples of Turkey and Saudi to pick apart what I said. This is a straw man; far as I know, the people I see daily wearing traditional muslim garb aren't from either of these countries. Would a woman be free to wear a bikini in ****stan without fear of comment (or worse); or would they be expected to conform?

It's the double standards I was questioning. We don't demand that women of whatever foreign descents conform to western ideals, but we take it as read that we'll have to compromise without question when roles are reversed. If we're being accommodating, is it too much to ask to be accommodated back in return?

xenophobic nonsense?

Excellent point, questioning antisocial symbols of oppression favoured by a single demographic of people is exactly the same situation as a fear and hatred of all things foreign.

I initially read the thread title as Mulsim Forks and wondered if religious bike parts were the new niche of choice

That said..... If someone can give me a valid reason, religious or otherwise for wearing a balaclava into a bank, I'd be interested to hear it.

It's the double standards I was questioning. We don't demand that women of whatever foreign descents conform to western ideals, but we take it as read that we'll have to compromise without question when roles are reversed. If we're being accommodating, is it too much to ask to be accommodated back in return?

Yup, there is a double standard in that in this country we are more tolerant and accepting of other cultures than a brutal theocracy or a near-failed state where religious extremists hold great sway.

I don't really see how that has any relevance to people here who choose to wear a niqab or burka. Seems a bit like holding them responsible for the actions of other people in the country they used to live in (or their parents did).

That said..... If someone can give me a valid reason, religious or otherwise for wearing a balaclava into a bank, I'd be interested to hear it.

Hmmm, it's January, the heating isn't working (in the bank) and you're cold!

If someone can give me a valid reason, religious or otherwise for wearing a balaclava into a bank, I'd be interested to hear it.

You may be indescribably ugly and scare small children with your fearsome countenance. There are people around here for whom that alone should be reason enough for them to wear a balaclava in public. 😀

But only an idiot (or a painfully liberal "progressive" one) would see this as anything other than oppression and misogyny at work.

You should look at the real reasons behind this and not half arsed examples of women who "choose" to cover their faces.

After all if I gave you an example of a ****stani who thinks its funny and acceptable to be called a "****" by his mates then you would be rightly horrified.

You should extend the same indignation to women here and abroad.

The veil has no place in British society it's completely counter to what we believe about the rights of women and so forth

The veil is not about personal choice it's an insidious device for the oppression of some muslim women.

If we're being accommodating, is it too much to ask to be accommodated back in return?

* FWIW lets not kid ourselves here that society is somehow free here. Much of the liberation of women is relatively recent. For example we had to enforce equal pay a mere 40 years ago and still the disparity in pay exists. Lets get our own house in order whilst we present ourselves as paragon to the world.

God said so is no longer a reasonable defence.
edit,that applies to that **** Blair as well.

It's the double standards I was questioning.

Cougar, you can't apply the same reasoning to both things, because they don't each carry the same weight.

It's the double standards I was questioning. We don't demand that women of whatever foreign descents conform to western ideals, but we take it as read that we'll have to compromise

2) it's not a double standard at all because what happens in the UK isn't some sort of reciprocal deal with everywhere else in the world. WGAF what happens in Saudi or Iran? Their lawmakers are a bunch of tossers for legislating women what they can wear. Why fall into the same trap in the UK?

Your "point" is just knuckle-dragging lounge-bar toss.

Well we have cited the Koran and the reasons it gives – oddly it does not mention the things you say. I guess all the people who do it are idiots and painfully progressive Liberals – that will come as a shock to the Taliban but hey thanks for the info

So work of fiction in not being accurate shocker 🙄

The Koran has been cited

So you agree that this is the reason? or do you think that there maybe other reasons at play?

Someone can do as they please – I would let them choose whether I approved or not

So you would ignore overt racism would you under the guise of "individual freedom"

And you accuse me of double standards.

You are the one with the contradictory position of telling me its bad to oppress women and force them to wear clothes of your choosing and then choosing to force them to wear clothes of your choosing.

Who mentioned force? your copy and paste skills are unrivaled so you should easily be able to find the quote?

Oh I forgeot your way of forcing them liberates them but the other lots way is oppressive.

Again this "force" thing. In fact a lot of your argument hinges on it, doesnt it?

I ride with someone who wears a buff over her face in winter – shall I liberate herself from herself because her actions run counter to what we believe?

Whose the "we" here? I like Buffs, is her Buff a sign of oppression in this instance?

When I use the term "liberate" I mean a persons freedom to choose without any pressures. Most reasonable people would accept that face covering in this instance is not a "free" choice in the same way that most people would agree that forced marriage is a bad thing despite the fact that we could all find examples of women who apparently claim it is a good thing and have long relationships afterwards.
That is my position and trying to add your veneer of "liberation" is a cop out.

konabunny - Member

1) it's not a double standard at all. The western ideal is that people choose what they wear when they get up in the morning. It's open to everyone in the UK (well, apart from kids, prisoners, soldiers and nudists, I suppose). If you choose to wear a mankini, that's up to you. If you're a wee free that wears a long skirt and headscarf, that's up to you too. If you don't like burkas, don't wear one.

Critical hit!

2) it's not a double standard at all because what happens in the UK isn't some sort of reciprocal deal with everywhere else in the world. WGAF what happens in Saudi or Iran? Their lawmakers are a bunch of tossers for legislating women what they can wear. Why fall into the same trap in the UK?

Indeed. It's like the weird logic when people are talking about 'well you'd get your head chopped off for saying something similar back in Saudi Arabia, so why do we put up with it here?'

What are they advocating there exactly? That we should demonstrate the wonders of our superior civilised society by becoming more like the one that we are slagging off for being backward. Eh? 😕

(probably haven't explained that very well)

Most reasonable people would accept that face covering in this instance is not a "free" choice...

Most reasonable people

This term is usually a cover for 'my opinion which I've decided should be shared by everyone else'.

FWIW I don't feel at all comfortable with the idea of the burqa/niqab and certainly not if people are being pressured into wearing them - but I feel far, far more uncomfortable with the idea of banning them.

I think it's entirely plausible, for instance, that some women might find it a bit of a relief to not be ogled by blokes while wearing one.

Should this be banned too btw? Or is it just the Muslims that shouldn't be allowed to wear stuff like that?

[img] [/img]

Most reasonable people would accept that face covering in this instance is not a "free" choice...

I think that might be an assumption too far for me.

Me too, but having said that, if women have been living in a society that has conditioned them into making this "free" choice. Is it really a "free" choice?

You could use that argument for the West- is that any more "free" as all societies have cultural norms.
Men hear dont wear skirts as rule but there is no real reason for it. Do you feel oppressed by this or are you conditioned to just not bother and fit in?

Surfer yes the Koran is unlikely to be true but it is till the main reason that the Muslims dress how they dress. Whether it is true or false does not alter this fact.
Yes IMHO other cultural factors within the region did influence the dress code but a muslim dresses like a "muslim" because they are a Muslim.

So you would ignore overt racism would you under the guise of "individual freedom"

And you accuse me of double standards.

Re force - if the veil is banned how are they not forced ? You are so keen on mocking my style [ quite well FWIW] that you have forgotten to make a coherent sensible argument.

When I use the term "liberate" I mean a persons freedom to choose without any pressures. Most reasonable people would accept that face covering in this instance is not a "free" choice

For the sake of fueluing an argument I am not suggesting you support the EDL

* I am sure some women [ Muslim and non Muslim] are forced to dress a certain way by others but I dont think us forcing them to dress a certain way is the solution to this problem

Me too, but having said that, if women have been living in a society that has conditioned them into making this "free" choice. Is it really a "free" choice?

That's a different issue altogether.

Just out of interest, when Christian women cover their hair, is that a form of oppression too? Should we ban that as well?

That's a different issue altogether.

That told me!

Quite a few Munters about who should be fforced to wear one IMHO

Kinda sorry I started this now but here goes:

All this talk of oppression is wrong headed in my view.

A portion of muslim women [b]choose[/b] to wear a veil. They do this [i]entirely of their own free will[/i] as an expression of their identity and in keeping with their religious and social beliefs about public modesty.

And they are quite rightly insulted by the notion that they are poor feeble women who must be rescued from their oppressive boorish misogynist husbands by the wise and noble non-muslim westerners.

Now I fully accept that it is possible that a portion of Muslim women in the UK [i]do[/i] feel forced to wear veils and [i]do[/i] feel oppressed by it. But surely that is an entirely different issue?

I'm quite sure there are also women in the UK who feel forced into getting a piercing or a tattoo, whose husbands force them to wear short skirts, or stay at home while he goes to the pub every night. But no one suggests that banning piercings, tattoos, short skirts or pubs is the answer!

I really don't see how introducing a law which says [i]"You need to wear less clothes so we can objectify you properly"[/i] would be a step forward for feminism or freedom.

if women have been living in a society that has conditioned them into making this "free" choice. Is it really a "free" choice?

Without wanting to get too far into the philosophy of free will, the exact same thing could be said for every choice you ever make!

I'm quite sure there are also women in the UK who feel forced into getting a piercing or a tattoo, whose husbands force them to wear short skirts, or stay at home while he goes to the pub every night. But no one suggests that banning piercings, tattoos, short skirts or pubs is the answer!

That's a good point, I guess we're focussing on the symptom, rather than the cause, and also making an assumption that there is a cause that needs to be tackled, when in reality there may not be.

I think it is such an emoptive issue because of the bluntness and obvious segregation of the clothing. Not segregation between genders or cultures, but between the person wearing it and the outside world. The communication barrier the veil creates makes it more emotive than any other kind of clothing and this does more to foster fear/suspicion than anything else.

Without wanting to get too far into the philosophy of free will, the exact same thing could be said for every choice you ever make!

Yeah I realise that. Probably one for another thread eh?!

its a real hot potato innit. personal freedom versus intimidating/offending.

[img] https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/4791746304/hB69DA0BB/ [/img]

I'd personally go with France, that religions should be more like 'a hobby' than an intrinsic part of what you 'are'. trouble is, that doesn't sit well with some religions.

DenDennis - Member

I'd personally go with France, that religions should be more like 'a hobby' than an intrinsic part of what you 'are'. trouble is, that doesn't sit well with [s]some[/s] any religions.

It kind of misses the entire point of religion tbh. I'm not religious but it's nothing at all like a hobby, if you're doing it right, it's a foundation stone of the person you are.

Burkas are an over-zealous interpretation of the Quran anyway, deliberately so in order for the men to continue to subjugate the women in Islamic countries - so I'm all for banning them.

@northwind- exactly,
but who's doing it right?
i know many jews who eat bacon, muslims who drink alcohol and dont always pray 5 times a day.

as an arbiter I think perhaps the most devout should decide-
here's osama aged 15.

[img] [/img]

I think I've got that album somewhere.

Just musing
and maybe got my facts all wrong but....
In the 60s weren't bras identified by feminists as implements of sexism for repressing women everywhere? hence bra burning and more than usual jiggling went on for a while until women decided "actually you know what they're not a bad idea"?

That's a different issue altogether.

That told me!

first rule of anthropology that DONK or else you end up saying things like this about cultures you know little about.

Burkas are an over-zealous interpretation of the Quran anyway, deliberately so in order for the men to continue to subjugate the women in Islamic countries - so I'm all for banning them.

Re bra burning at a Miss World pageant where they threw female products [ false eyelashes. hair curlers etc- stuff associated with beauty] into a trash can including bras to burn - mimicking vietnam draft dodgers burning their draft cards. The police stopped them actually having a fire. I dont know if it ever happened but it must have somewhere.

kind of is tho isn't it. As junkyard said we've all (mostly, ignoring that kilt stuff) been indoctrinated that skirts are not acceptable leg/bottom wear for blokes. We're all conditioned. Apparently you can't objectively critique other cultures, your own bias will always skew it.

All true DONK. I think though that you can objectively critique other cultures if you're aware of your own bias and if you're willing to have your views challenged by those who have a different perspective. Much like this thread really.

Don't flame me for the source, but a quick Google on braburning:

http://womenshistory.about.com/od/mythsofwomenshistory/a/bra_burning.htm

Not techsavvy enough to make proper links. 🙄

Edit - Oh, it does it automatically! How clever.

Straw man as I never said that

When I gave you a hypothetical example of a ****stani being called a "****" by his mates and then claiming he was fine with it you responded with something along the lines that you would have no problem etc as it was his choice. I on the other hand would find that unacceptable in spite of the fact that he doesnt.
This is an important point and I went on to add later hypothetical examples of victims of forced marriage who thought arranged marriages were a good thing.
The question is if these were real examples (and I could find actual ones) would you think that both practices were acceptable? I for one would not.
Would we find female genital mutilation acceptable if we found victims of it who did?

It would be better if you could explain how you telling them how to dress is the best response to someone telling them how to dress. Can you do that please whilst explaining how it is not a double standard? Should be entertaining.

Well at least you are removing the force/compulsion aspect of your previous argument which you accused me of (but found no evidence of!) but you are creating another straw man. Are you saying that me wanting to remove the compulsion and pressure that women feel to wear a body/face covering is on a equal par with those wanting to force it upon them? Are you saying they are equal evils?

if the veil is banned how are they not forced

I didnt say ban it.

And in the interest of not fueling the argument that you werent creating 🙄 alligning me with the EDL is a really cheap trick but if thats the way you debate.

This term is usually a cover for 'my opinion which I've decided should be shared by everyone else'.

I agree, I take it back 😳

Would we find female genital mutilation acceptable if we found victims of it who did?

Well... it's pretty easy to find victims of [i]male[/i] genital mutilation who seem quite happy about it.

I didnt say ban it.

Okay. Many others have mentioned banning though. If you don't think a ban is the answer (and I don't) then how [i]do[/i] you want [i]"to remove the compulsion and pressure that women feel to wear a body/face covering"[/i]? And what about those women that don't feel forced and wear it through free choice?

alligning me with the EDL is a really cheap trick but if thats the way you debate.

How exactly would you have liked me to make it clearer that I was not doing that

Maybe by not mentioning it? Face palm indeed

Ok next time I will not mention that i am not comparing you to the EDL when I point out they agree with you.