Saw this today, which relates to some degree. http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/29/tamerlan-tsarnaevs-ex-girlfriend-he-beat-me-wearin/
Yeah, but it's all "their choice". Mathloom and Hydhypedplaya are the big defenders of women's rights to wear...what they tell them to wear. In other news, the violent Islamists in Bangladesh demand that women be more covered and must not mix with men anymore. What do all these people have in common? Yup.
Being forced to do something is the absence of choice genius boy. Banning the garments would infringe on the rights of those who are not forced to wear it, but choose to. It also pretty much guarantees that those women who were forced to wear it will probably never get to leave the house ever again. For a "lawyer" you sure can't think comprehensively. Neither could Hans Frank.
Seriously? How childish and out of line. By the way -- I can't imagine Muhammed would look kindly upon insulting others like you're doing. Between this and glynch comparing Ted Cruz to Adolf Hilter, today has truly been a horrible day for the civility of the board.
That argument always baffles me. "Allow our women to cover themselves with a mobile jail, because otherwise we will have to force them to stay in the house and we will not be able to allow them to leave it." Do you even realize how messed up this way of thinking is? The problem is not the law to ban the mobile jails - the problem is the ideology in the heads of men who want their women to either literally be jailed (at home) or at least be covered by a mobile jail.
Do you believe the men who force women to wear the garment would allow them to leave the house if they were not wearing it (ie - if a ban on the garment was there)? Funny, I think the entire board thinks the same thing when they read any of your asinine threads/posts. And what solution are you proposing? Banning the garment won't change the mindset of radicalism. Instead it would infringe on the rights of those women who choose to wear it. The women who are forced wear it by certain men in public will instead not be able to go out in public by those same men.
I think the bigger issue here isn't whether or not to ban the burqa, but instead, how do we deal with the issue of "women who are forced wear it by certain men in public"?
The right idea but this is focusing on the tree instead of the forest. We should be focusing on improving women's access to education, economic opportunities, sexual and reproductive freedom instead of what they are wearing.
Jail the men. Educate about how messed up the ideology behind what these men do is. Fight the ideology. Just look at Bangladesh. These r****ded Islamists over there are openly advocating further oppression of women and more violence against people who do not believe what they believe. And you don't think these issues are related? The mobile jail is not only a symbolism for oppression of women, but you will see a clear correlation between the mobile jail and a deprivation of the other rights you mentioned above.
I agree that the Burkha is related to the problems I listed but it is a symptom not the cause. My own view is that focusing on things like the Burkha become a distraction from the main issues, you get into arguments about freedom of fashion choice like this thread.
Lack of women's access to education, economic opportunities, sexual and reproductive freedom... ...are also symptoms. The cause is the underlying ideology which sees women as inferior. And that is deeply rooted in the ideology. Just look at the value of a woman's voice in court compared to that of a man under Sharia law.
