European Politics

Ah, my mistake then. I remembered reading something about hijab banned there (though I'm not sure now whether in the meaning "Islamic dress code" or in the "khimar = hijab" - that head scarf - meaning), but it was probably nonsense.
 
Hijabs were banned from government facilities for years, until Erdoğan's government lifted it about 7-8 years ago.

Hijab: Türban, eşarp or baş örtüsü (headscarf)
Burqa: Çarşaf (sheet) or kara çarşaf (black sheet)

Hijab has pretty big political value here, because Islamists and conservatives considered the ban on hijab an attack on Islam. Lifting the ban is considered a conquest for them. I thought the ban was stupid myself, and it put unnecessary political value in a piece of clothing.
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah, that must be it. I admit I'm kind of losing myself in all those types and names - hijab, burqa, chador, abaya, niquab, khimar... let alone where is each given type mandatory, where it's encouraged, where it's forbidden etc.
 
A lot of these are parts of different local traditions and sometimes they are basically different names for the same thing. What we call the burqa is known as chadari in Afghanistan. The term burqa is Arabic, but in most parts of Arabia, the niqab is more widespread. The veiling background is almost the same, but they are still different types of garments. It really depends a lot on the traditions and the branch of Islam current what is used where and called how.
 
jazz from hell said:
I mean, from this perspective: If the banning of burqas leads to more women wearing hijabs (that's what I say), which will lead to more women being integrated into our society (that's what you say), we should go for it, no?
Click to expand...

Good lord that's not at all what I said.

What I said was when given the choice, the percentage of women who opt to wear a hijab are more likely to be integrated into Western society than those who opt to wear a burqa. If you take burqas away, you won't be able to make that distinction. That's the point: I'm against banning burqas for this reason.

This is not about the clothing items themselves, this is about what they represent. Hijab wearing women are usually moderate or conservative Muslims, few of them are actual radical Islamists. The percentage of radicals in burqa wearing women is way higher. If you force them to wear the same thing, you won't be able to make that distinction.
 
Last edited:
It would happen. There are historical precedents for this outlook.
 
I have distant family members who wear burqa in public. They wouldn't be allowed out of their houses if they weren't allowed to wear burqas in public, and you can take that to the bank.

You're talking about radical Islamists here. "Hoping they wouldn't go that far" is a bit naive.
 
If only burqas looked like this. That would be rad.

Nlj6bVW.gif
 
The Flash said:
I have distant family members who wear burqa in public. They wouldn't be allowed out of their houses if they weren't allowed to wear burqas in public, and you can take that to the bank.

You're talking about radical Islamists here. "Hoping they wouldn't go that far" is a bit naive.
Click to expand...


That is pretty much what I was thinking as well ...
 
jazz from hell said:
So if you think it's naive to demand from the state to be capable of enforcing the prohibition of burqas,
Click to expand...

That's not what anyone was talking about. The ban can be enforced. It's naive to think it will solve any problems. It will just make most women who would normally wear burqas not leave their homes and be a cause for contempt among their male peers.
 
Those are tourists. It's something different with people who actually live in a place with such a law.
 
Okay, let's look at a country that is not Switzerland. In France, the law was introduced in 2011. It is being widely ignored by Muslimas from face veiling traditions, and attempts to enforce the law have in some cases led to violent clashes. There is no indication that any women are liberated from anything by it.

There are historical precedents that tell us that banning Muslim garment results in women not going out in public and a general rise in support for fundamentalist Islam. The burqa is still widespread in Afghanistan despite the fact that the laws that made it compulsory were lifted in 2001.

How many women are staying at home in France and Belgium because of the burqa laws? We don't know. Muslim societies with veiling traditions are highly protective of privacy, so it's not possible to obtain any reliable data unless you decide to intrude every Muslim household to find out. But the evidence we have points in that direction. I'm sorry, but I don't think that six tourists in one Swiss canton change the overall picture.
 
jazz from hell said:
Since the law has come into force in july, the number of 6 you've mentioned represents all the tourists that the police had to 'explain' the rules to, because they were walking around with their burqas ON -- it might also be worth mentioning that when the police actually showed up and talked to their respective husbands, all of them not only put the burqas down like it's no problem, but they also reacted politely and some of them even apologized.
But this is NOT counting the ones who put their burqas down before they entered the region! How many these are we don't know, but the association of hoteliers confirms that the predicted decline of tourists from Arabic countries didn't occur, in fact that there's an increase of tourists from these regions by 20%, and that they're understanding towards the law.
So to say that the example is only about 6 people is a gross oversimplification.
Click to expand...

There still is the highly significant difference that these are tourists, not residents. That's really more what I was going on about. Tourists are generally willing to abide by laws they don't agree with when visiting a foreign country. It's a different thing altogether when a law is passed that imposes a ban on people who permanently live in this area. They won't just take off the veil for two weeks and then return home. Hence, it's a apples and oranges.
 
jazz from hell said:
The question is, how much does the burka as a symbol against oppression weigh against the burqa as a tool of effective oppression?
Click to expand...

That's a good question. I've studied the matter for quite a while now, and I haven't found an answer to it.

jazz from hell said:
The importance of the burqa is so huge to the people that make their women wear it, that they would certainly cage them if it was prohibited. On the other hand, the importance of the burqa is not big enough to them to skip just one city on their travelling trip.

How am I supposed to respect that?
Click to expand...

You can start by appreciating that "the burqa" as a monolithic matter does not exist. I'm going to permit myself a wild guess here and say that the burqa-clad tourists in Switzerland are probably from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar or any other wealthy Gulf state. The native people who live there are quite well off economically speaking, and they can afford to bend the rules a little bit. Wealth often correlates with relative liberty. If these people are truly religious, they might imagine compensating for taking off the veil by donating to a pious foundation or making an extra trip to Mecca. Maybe they also don't care and abide to the old "If in Rome" principle.
These tourists are most likely not from Afghanistan, Pakistan or the lower classes from Algeria or Morocco. The social, economic, ethnical and traditional situation in these countries and among immigrants from these countries is very, very different. The burqa has a more profound meaning to many of these people. It's not just a matter of abiding to a religious interpretation that can be balanced out on their piety account, but it's a way of clinging to a certain set of morals, traditions and values that has all the more meaning if they are detached from their homes (actual or imagined) or in an enduring state of misery.

Again, to make this clear in the broader context: I'm not proclaiming an opinion on whether or not a country like Germany has the right of saying it does not want to welcome people like those in, but at the very least, it should be honest and informed if making such a decision.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37147717

If this is to be trusted, seeing as it's coming from Erdogan, than holy fucking shit. The fact that an early teenager at best has determined that his life is worth sacrificing to a cause is just gut-wrenching. More and more of a sign that Islam is an insidious ideology, and this is just going to give more ammunition to the chest-beating nationalists within Europe to discriminate against middle eastern nationals, regardless of age now it seems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top