Want to create some patterns for the Sims 3?
Just installed the Sims 3 patch or about to?
Want to create your own clothes for the Sims 3?
| Search this Thread |
30th Apr 2010, 11:59 AM
|
 Belgium bans burqas
#1
|
| jooxis |
Belgium bans burqa-type dress in public I think several more European countries are aiming to go down this path. What do you think? Is this progress or is it the opposite? I'm sort of on the fence for this one. On one hand, I do believe people should just wear whatever they want/feel comfortable in and not have to justify it to anyone... but on the other hand, a woman in a burqa is pretty much a walking symbol of oppression against women and I understand it's not a very pleasant sight for Westerners who would want everyone to at least seem equal. Although the article gives a different explanation and has to do with national identity and security reasons... somewhat valid too, I suppose. |
|
|
Last edited by jooxis : 30th Apr 2010 at 12:14 PM.
|
|
30th Apr 2010, 07:51 PM
|
#2 | |
|
Safyre420
Banned
Join Date: May 2006 |
Quote:
Eroding of national identity and refusal to assimilate in western society? Seriously? What about personal identity? And since when was western society trying to assimilate anyone? Personally, I think this is the opposite of progress. The Belgian government is seriously infringing on someone's right to wear whatever they want. |
|
|
|
|
|
30th Apr 2010, 10:03 PM
|
#3 | |
|
Purity4
Forum Resident
Join Date: Nov 2009 |
Quote:
:yeah This is just all wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
30th Apr 2010, 10:10 PM
|
#4 | |
|
Safyre420
Banned
Join Date: May 2006 |
I'm also willing to say that this borders on profiling, if it isn't already into profiling territory. So some terrorists wearing burqas killed some people...what do you do? Ban burqas! Because they're obviously the cause of the problem. Hell why not just ban middle eastern culture while your at it since it's not "western society". Yes I understand the security issues at hand but banning burqas isn't the way to solve the problem. Best way to prevent people from hiding their face and concealing weapons is to force everyone to go naked, then there really isn't many places for anyone to hide ANYTHING. ETA: Quote:
How exactly does wearing a burqa clash with the principles of an emancipated society that respects the rights of all? What about the female's right to wear the burqa if she so chooses? Way to respect the rights of all by banning burqas. |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 01:07 AM
|
#5 | |
|
simbalena
Top Secret Researcher
Join Date: Jul 2009 |
Quote:
I agree, but it's even more oppressive than simply not allowing people to wear what they want. It's religious oppression and discrimination as these women are obliged to wear a burqa as part of their religion. If their religion dictates that they must be fully covered in public then governments who ban their clothing are forcing them into being housebound prisoners, which is more oppressive to women than a religion that says they must be covered up. In theory there is a possibility of someone using a burqa to conceal a crime, but obviously there should be many documented cases of women using burqa's to commit crimes before banning them should be even considered let alone enforced. There are cases of women wearing fake pregnancy stomachs to shoplift, maybe we need to start frisking all pregnant women before they enter a store? Or force them to wear clothing that exposes their stomach so we all know it's real! |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 01:20 AM
|
#6 |
|
appelsapgodin
|
Actually I don't quite care about the fact that it is something that touches on religion also, for me it is not an issue which kind of religion someone practices. What counts for me in this case is that if you are, for example, a left-wing radical anarchist squatter, you cannot wear a balaklava in public either. So any other outfit that covers most of someones face in public is forbidden too. (religious object or not.) |
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 01:44 AM
|
#7 |
|
Ekimsal
Test Subject
Join Date: Aug 2009 |
But balaclava's are not banned in a sanctimonious attempt to protect right. The fact is that Europe is uncomfortable with Muslim immigrants and wants to hide any of their outward symbols. If someone wants to wear a Burqa or Niqab then that's their choice. |
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 02:35 AM
|
#8 |
|
~Dee~
|
If you immigrate to a totally different country to your own you've to expect changes, you can't expect to live your life the same way then you did before. That includes all nationalities. You've to become part of that country if you want to call it home, that includes learning the language and learning a new lifestyle. Abiding by the laws of that country is part of that process. If wearing an outfit what covers you from head to toe is not part of your chosen countries lifestyle, it should be respected. If that interferes with the religion you practice, you shouldn't immigrate to a country like that, rather choose one what is more similar to your own. An example: If I immigrate to any Arabic country I would be expected to live by the laws of that country, would I be able to still wear my western clothes...I don't think so. I would've to change and live the way their live. |
|
You can find more of my stuff here: http://www.blackpearlsims.com/downloads.php |
|
|
|
Last edited by ~Dee~ : 1st May 2010 at 02:51 AM.
|
|
1st May 2010, 02:47 AM
|
#9 |
|
Nekowolf
Scholar
Join Date: Dec 2008 |
But is that not reverting back to a standard not in favor of individual liberties, but by the majority? That the majority defines what is "morally acceptable" is what we have done years ago. And you know what it can cause? Prejudice. I know I'm projecting American ideals, but let's face it, they are ideas not to be scoffed by a civilized world that wishes to progress. I can agree on some respects, such as learning the common language and abiding by their laws, but to be forced under prosecution to give up your lifestyle, especially one that does not harm others, for shame. It is no better than, say, illegalizing wearing rainbow shirts, because the rainbow is used as a symbol of gay pride. So I say again; for shame. |
|
Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God? |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 03:01 AM
|
#10 | |
|
Oaktree
|
Quote:
There are different levels of expectation when one moves to another country. For the most part, you are expected to assimilate the behavior that allows you to interact peacefully with your neighbors, including language and etiquette. Clothing, so long as it is "decent", should not be expected to change. Dressing a certain way does not (or at least should not, in an enlightened society) have any impact on how you interact with your neighbors. On the other hand, I think that forcing women to wear burqas is wrong. It is a wrong that cannot be properly addressed in this manner, however. If a woman chooses to wear a burqa, there is nothing wrong with it and banning it is encroaching on her liberty. The only way to properly address the wrong of forcing women to wear burqas is if the matter is solved at its source. European law is not its source, so any attempt at fixing the problem there will be ineffective and unjust. Additionally, I think that it is wrong that Western attire would be frowned upon in Muslim countries. Western attire is, in the majority of cases, "decent", as it covers what it is supposed to. The fact that it would be frowned on in Muslim countries shows that those countries are close-minded and intolerant. |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 03:12 AM
|
#11 | |
|
grumpy_otter
Field Researcher
Join Date: Feb 2010 |
Quote:
I disagree with this--I find the idea of burqas so absolutely offensive on every level that I think women who "choose" to wear them should be guilty of child abuse, if they have children, and guilty of crimes against every other woman on the planet if they don't have children. It is a disgusting symbol of a millennium of masculine oppression and it makes me ill. Whether it is religiously dictated or not, I hate it. I think that every member of an oppressed group has an obligation not to make things harder for other members of that group--and choosing to wear a burqa sends the message that it is fine to oppress women in that way. |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 03:21 AM
|
#12 |
|
~Dee~
|
Prejudice is still rampant we've made no progress at all. People still getting prejudiced if they look different, have an accent, dress differently etc. But covering your whole body in a country where the majority doesn't, is no way to avoid prejudice. I don't think it should be made law...but I think it should be discouraged. Like I said above, you've to make certain adjustments if you want to live in harmony in your new country. If I immigrate to an Arabic country to make it my new home, I would've to cover myself, nobody would respect the fact that it is against my usual lifestyle. You've to adjust to that countries ways, that's just how it is... if you don't want to be prejudiced that is. |
|
You can find more of my stuff here: http://www.blackpearlsims.com/downloads.php |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 03:27 AM
|
#13 | |
|
Oaktree
|
Quote:
I was viewing it more in terms of its utilitarian use. Desert garb is often long and layered like a burqa, so a woman wearing (practical) desert garb would be wearing something that would look quite similar. I can understand that the burqa has a certain meaning associated with it, but I don't think that it will hold the same meaning several generations after Muslim fundamentalism has vanished. Basically, the clothing in-itself has no moral value; it is the social projections onto that item of clothing that have the moral value (in this case, a strongly negative one). I think that the moral value of wearing the item would depend on the context. If someone is wearing it specifically to support Muslim fundamentalism, it is wrong. If someone is wearing it for its value in retaining water and protecting one's skin from the sun in desert conditions, there is no moral value. |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 02:56 PM
|
#14 | |
|
grumpy_otter
Field Researcher
Join Date: Feb 2010 |
Quote:
While that perspective certainly has merit, I don't think the burqa is ever used for its utilitarian value--because there are much better designed outfits for desert wear. As far as I know, the only purpose of a burqa is to oppress women. |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 02:54 PM
|
#15 | |
|
coltraz
|
Quote:
I think you are spot on. When in Rome... | |
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 04:25 PM
|
#16 | |
|
Oaktree
|
Quote:
You do have a good point here, but I'm still a little wary of the idea of banning burqas in Europe before they have fallen out of favor in the Middle East. I honestly don't know whether it would cause people to simply change their ways, or whether it would essentially keep a certain demographic out of the country. I imagine there would be a little of both. On the one hand, if some violent Muslim fundamentalists want to move to Belgium, the country has every right to deny them access. On the other, if they are fundamentalists in ideology, but, in most regards, not in practice (I do know some people like this), they are essentially the same as any other demographic that would want to move to Belgium, though they might fall into the category of people who would change their habits due to the law. Belgium has the right to choose which people get to move there and which don't, but this makes it seem like the standards are set to prevent a certain demographic from coming to the country in the same levels as other demographics. I really can't decide whether this is a good or a bad thing. It clearly isn't a perfect solution, but rarely does a perfect solution present itself. In short, I am confused. :P |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 06:23 PM
|
#17 | |
|
ivan17
Lab Assistant
Join Date: Aug 2009 |
Quote:
I think that this is really insolently. It is restriction of freedom. It will be great to make protest parade. If gays can make protest parade, I think that they should. |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 06:23 PM
|
#18 | |
|
grumpy_otter
Field Researcher
Join Date: Feb 2010 |
Quote:
I'm with you--I don't know if legislation is the right answer. Although, legislation has been pretty effective in the USA in working toward getting rid of segregation. What angers me the MOST about many of these oppressive things--such as female genital mutilation--is that it is women who keep it alive. Or at least, don't protest. Women take their daughters to the female cutter; women encourage their daughters to recite oppressive Bible verses at their weddings; women marry their daughters off at 14 to 60 year old men. |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 06:28 PM
|
#19 |
|
Nekowolf
Scholar
Join Date: Dec 2008 |
But you must not ignore that there is more to it than simply women allow it to continue. It's a multilateral problem. |
|
Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God? |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 07:00 PM
|
#20 | |
|
grumpy_otter
Field Researcher
Join Date: Feb 2010 |
Quote:
Oh yes, of course. That's just the part that makes me angriest. |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 07:07 PM
|
#21 |
|
Nekowolf
Scholar
Join Date: Dec 2008 |
I'm curious. What would you suggest for protest? And what about the extreme punishments of these regions for dissent? Would you still protest if it meant the cost of human lives? Because, it surely would. What if a mother refused and was executed? The daughter would likely just get turned over to someone else. Would it then be worth it? |
|
Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God? |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 07:35 PM
|
#22 |
|
Neerie
Field Researcher
Join Date: May 2009 |
Similar issues has been/is happening in Quebec, but lately it was mostly focused on the niqab and not the burqa, but overall it gets down to the same general idea. What started the issue here was when women wearing full-face covering garb demanded that they should not be asked to remove it even for personnal identification purposes, for elections for example. Mix that with some women demanding to be served only by woman, and some men refusing to be offered social services by women, and this was a good brew for a big mess. (and I'm skipping a lot of incidents) I shall keep it to the topic of full-face covering garb here, but it came down to this: some people, basing their argument on religion freedom, were demanding that everyone else accomodate them with their requests. Then considering that even muslim social groups said that wearing a niqab/burqa/hijab/what have you, was NOT required by the muslim religion and that it was mostly different local cultural things usually brought up by the men about how improper it was for a woman to be seen, THIS was what ended up getting us a law (or maybe it's still being voted on, I'm not sure), that would require everyone to recieve, and offer, government services (including healthcare) with an uncovered face. |
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 08:33 PM
|
#23 |
|
fakepeeps7
Site Helper
Join Date: Jan 2006 |
This is one of the problems with our multicultural, global world. Not that multiculturalism is bad; it just creates problems that our forebears didn't have to deal with (on this scale, anyway). Personally, I think it's very disrespectful of immigrants to move to a new country and expect everyone to cater to their social mores and taboos. There's a total double standard, too. If I tried to do the same thing (and walked around wearing a tank top, shorts, and an uncovered head), I could get myself killed. Why do we have to make concessions for immigrants with different ideals when they don't? But I don't know if legislation is the answer. People will always whine about "choice" (although I don't see how wearing a burqa is a "choice", since women are conditioned to make it). Such a ban probably wouldn't be completely successful (or peaceful), anyway. It's probably best if the Middle Eastern community comes around on their own. But we've been waiting for their antiquated opinions regarding women to evolve for a while now. I'm not going to hold my breath. |
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 08:44 PM
|
#24 | |
|
grumpy_otter
Field Researcher
Join Date: Feb 2010 |
Quote:
I'm not sure what the answer is, but I do know that in the United States, anti-segregation legislation has helped THAT situation--and yes, people died to achieve those rights. I'm not saying that legislation will, overnight, fix the problem--it is a long process and we in the US are still fighting it. However, legislation does prevent those human-rights-violating activities to continue in public--and that is helpful for future generations. My grandparents thought segregation was the way things should be, my mother expressed surprise the first time she saw black women eating in the same cafe as she, I went to a completely integrated school as a child, and my daughter had to learn what segregation was in school. I think this desegregation experiment has been a success--and it was almost all accomplished through legislation--some congress or court said, you can't do this anymore. Which doesn't mean that we have stomped out all racist assholes--but their numbers are shrinking, and our society no longer believes segregation is normal. I hope to see the same thing with gay rights in my country, as well as Islamic countries in regard to the burqa. EDIT: Hey! I just noticed the "agree" "disagree" "love" buttons! Cool! Got a lot of catching up to do! |
|
|
|
|
|
1st May 2010, 08:57 PM
|
#25 |
|
el_flel
|
There was a brilliant documentary broadcast here in the UK recently on BBC3 called 'Women, Weddings, War and Me '. The documentary was about a young woman whose parents moved to the UK from Afghanistan when she was 6, and she wanted to go back there to see how different it is. I found it fascinating and very moving, it is unbelievable how women are treated there and I felt very lucky to live where I do. The reason I mentioned it is because there was a part where she had to put a burqa on because she felt so uncomfortable at the amount of people staring at her because she wasn't wearing one. In that respect I find myself agreeing with ~Dee~'s post. The article mentions that one of the reasons for banning the burqa is that it's a sign that women are refusing to assimilate with Western Society. In the documentary the girl had to abide by the country's dresscode, so why should it be any different for people coming to Western countries? But at the same time the ban in Belgium is also restricting what people choose to wear, just like in Afghanistan. I understand their concerns for security, but I don't think that alone should be a reason for banning them completely (even though, like grumpy_otter, I despise everything that they stand for). Ban them in certain places where security is a constant issue, sure, but not everywhere. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Twitter
del.icio.us
StumbleUpon
Google