Support NeoGAF

[ClosingADoor]

I seriously don't get it...

Honest question, can a women, any woman, legitimately choose to become a conservative salafist muslim? Do any of you supporting this ban believe that a woman can, by choice, be a conservative muslim? I'm not asking if you agree with her choice. I'm not asking if you think her choice is a feminist one, a helpful one or a rational one. I am just asking if it is a legitimate decision to make. I mean, we already know the answer. Women not born into muslims families have, as adults, decided to become salafist muslims and wear a face-veil. Are those women mentally ill? I'm not asking if you think they're misogynistic or sexist. They might very well be. After all, they've decided to believe in a patriarchal religion. But as far as I know believing in a patriarchal religion isn't forbidden. Being a misogynist isn't forbidden (hell it might make you president of the US). There are plenty of orthodox jewish women and extremely conservative christian women living in the west. Are all of those women making decisions and living lives they shouldn't? Should they be barred from making those decisions/living those lives? Or should only conservative muslim women be told their decisions are illegitimate. That their decisions aren't 'western' enough.

Yes, people can chose to wear it themselves. But that isn't always the case. And even if it is, it is not clothing that most Western countries (and I'm guessing a lot of others also, but they lack immigration from Muslim countries) are going to be OK with. If I chose to wear a helmet everywhere covering my face, it would also be an issue.

It is a combination of different factors. The burqa itself being a sign of misogyny and oppression. It being forced on people in some cases. It being a safety issue. And it preventing those women from functioning in wider society, leading to social isolation, while we already have major problems integrating these groups.

When I say salafism isn't always bad I mean that salafism isn't always illegal. In fact, it isn't illegal, violent or dangerous most of the time. Most of the time salafism is an apolitical minority strain of conservative Islam. Maybe you think the beliefs that make up salafism are still bad. Fair enough. I do too, in the exact same way that I think the beliefs that make up most religious conservatism is bad. In the way that I think the modern Republican party in the US and the Conservatives in the UK are 'bad'. I don't agree with them. I argue against them. But I wouldn't want to see them outlawed. I don't want to fight them by excluding them from society. The same goes for salafism.

When salafist movements are being used to bring extremist views towards other countries, I most definitely want to see that influence being cut off. Not banning people from believing in it, but if your faith includes things like anti-gay thought, that should not be allowed to be preached, since it is hate speech.

I don't understand how anyone supporting this ban can't see that their comments are quite clearly about disliking Islam as a whole or at least a strain within Islam and not at all about the women involved. No one here supporting this ban seems even the slightest bit interested in the women involved. And the women involved are the only thing that matters on this topic. I don't give a flying fuck what someone thinks about Islam, muslims or salafism. Your opinions on those matters shouldn't play a role at all in a ban that might curtail the freedom of women.

It is about a dislike of extremist religions and unfortunately the ultra-conservative streams of Islam are the most prominent at the moment. I don't think anybody has a problem with moderate Islam, I certainly don't. But just as I dislike the ultra-conservative Christians in the US for their bullshit anti-gay and anti-abortion practices, I dislike ultra-conservative movements of Islam also.

I care about muslim women because I care about people in general but also because I am myself from a muslim family. I have debated against Islam's view on women numerous times. I have had such debates against muslim men and women. But I see those men and women as fully realized people, people that can make their own decisions. As I said, abuse is already illegal. All we can do is create an evermore inclusive society where everybody feels welcome and able to participate. This ban will not help with that. Instead, it will play into the hands of the racist and Islamophobic far-right.

But please do continue straw-manning me, pretending as if I'm calling everyone here an Islamophobe. Or just continue telling me you're not reading my posts because of a single sentence that you clearly did not understand.

How is it playing into the hands of racists (but like some other poster already said, the term racist here might not actually apply) and Islamophobic far-right? Like I said earlier, I feel the Left should pick up this struggle and again position themselves as the progressive ones who do not stand for intolerant things like the burqa. Yet the Left is quiet on this front and hides behind the argument of religious freedom all the time, leaving that position now open to the right, which is a bit strange to say the least.

 

[Audioboxer]

Yes, people can chose to wear it themselves. But that isn't always the case. And even if it is, it is not clothing that most Western countries (and I'm guessing a lot of others also, but they lack immigration from Muslim countries) are going to be OK with. If I chose to wear a helmet everywhere covering my face, it would also be an issue.

It is a combination of different factors. The burqa itself being a sign of misogyny and oppression. It being forced on people in some cases. It being a safety issue. And it preventing those women from functioning in wider society, leading to social isolation, while we already have major problems integrating these groups.


When salafist movements are being used to bring extremist views towards other countries, I most definitely want to see that influence being cut off. Not banning people from believing in it, but if your faith includes things like anti-gay thought, that should not be allowed to be preached, since it is hate speech.


It is about a dislike of extremist religions and unfortunately the ultra-conservative streams of Islam are the most prominent at the moment. I don't think anybody has a problem with moderate Islam, I certainly don't. But just as I dislike the ultra-conservative Christians in the US for their bullshit anti-gay and anti-abortion practices, I dislike ultra-conservative movements of Islam also.


How is it playing into the hands of racists (but like some other poster already said, the term racist here might not actually apply) and Islamophobic far-right? Like I said earlier, I feel the Left should pick up this struggle and again position themselves as the progressive ones who do not stand for intolerant things like the burqa. Yet the Left is quiet on this front and hides behind the argument of religious freedom all the time, leaving that position now open to the right, which is a bit strange to say the least.

Many on the left just don't like to put their pride in check and admit some of the topics the right bring up are valid, it's just the careless, hateful and divisive ways of the right that should be condemned. Not the actual topics themselves.

Immigration itself has been made a bad word. Immigration. There is nothing wrong with the word. Nor is there discussing it. Nor is there any country wishing to value their own principles and do reasonable, humane screening. However those on the left like deer in headlights cannot handle saying the words as everything the right makes a mess of these days is like saying voldemorts name on the left. Better not mention immigration in anyway because that clearly means you are a Trump/Farage sympathiser.

This attitude is one large thing I am going nuts at the left for continuing to do. It creates that empty vacuum where people are lost to the right as the left has its head so far up its ass to pandering to not being called names it utterly refuses to even enter the debate on legimately serious topics.

Merkel is no doubt being reactionary, but how do you get there? You bring your country to its knees refusing to discuss and try and tackle serious topics. You get German rape gangs and fail to deal with them. Just as the UK did With Rotherham. Then to top it off you have far right parties who at the very least bring up the uncomfortable topics and then get sympathisers in the public who are just sick that the left has gone to sleep. Which is hugely ironic as usually the left is on the forefront of women's rights and equality. What a mess. None of this is coincidence, nor is the rise of far right parties. Or at least people not bothering with liberal parties which in return empowers the far right.

 

[Pusherman]

Just a quick thing about the race thing. Islam in the west is absolutely racialized. Muslims are the foreign other. They are 'different' not just in beliefs but also in how they look. Like I said, I am myself an atheist but I will never not be ascribed a muslim identity, at least here in the Netherlands, just on the basis of my looks and my arabic name. Islamophobia and racism are quite intimately linked.

And about the role of the left... I am a leftist progressive. I have had many a discussion on Islam, women's rights and homosexuality. I think it is incumbent on me to speak out against any bigotry I see in my own vicinity. But speaking out is different from excluding, banning and legislating. The left has fought against bigotry without banning christianity or judaism, not even their most conservative strains. We thankfully live in a place where women can have premarital sex with whoever they want but that hasn't stopped conservative nuns from existing.

By all means protest the niqab or burka. Some muslim feminists like Mona Eltahawy do so quite vigorously (before you look her up, she has in fact supported a ban on the burka and niqab). But just because I fully understand and support such protests does not mean that I feel justified to then turn around and ignore women like this:

http://idealmuslimah.com/calling-to...n-letter-to-mona-eltahawy-regarding-the-niqab

who disagree with a ban and also deserve to be heard. Again, I just don't get it. I am in support of listening to women and letting them speak for themselves. I am in support of freedom even if that freedom is used for something I (intensely) dislike. I don't get how you can be for a ban but against hearing what the women involved have to say and still believe you are somehow working an behave of those same women. If you honestly don't care about those women but instead support a ban on the burka because you're afraid of Europe losing it's identity or because you just don't want to see certain things around in Europe, even if that means denying people a choice, then all I can say is that I don't think those arguments are ever a legitimate reason for banning a cultural/religious garment.

 

[Audioboxer]

Fact of the mater is though we have and will continue to legislate against religious expression when it over steps certain values. What happens in America if you refuse to as a state stop gay marriage hand outs? You get in legal trouble. It doesn't matter if you are a Christian. As many others say all the time you also get asked over here to remove full face coverings in high security areas. Reject doing so? You'll be ejected if not have the police called on you.

Like it or not culturally we do make up rules and laws. Some of them outside strict government intervention, but they still happen. Invisible laws I quite smartly seen them referred to in here. It's our flawed but humanly attempted way to prioritise what is healthy and what is oppressive in society. There is a lot of psychological elements to this, one of which is an evolutionary human distrust of not being able to see a face at all and its social cues. This is incredibly harmful to assimilation as well. We are a social species. Suppress that and you suffer.

Instead of people being so upset about our stumbling through our flawed but good intentions legal systems, why not go after the places where Sharia Law, honour killings and jailing of people is seen on mass? There is always so many faux-liberals going all out on the terrible Western culture and it being "unfair". Where are they all when we mention the likes of Saudi Arabia? Well I guess if they think it's Islamophobic for a Western country to try and prioritise its values they aren't even going to touch a country like that in fear of looking hypocritical.

 

[Nepenthe]

Just a quick thing about the race thing. Islam in the west is absolutely racialized. Muslims are the foreign other. They are 'different' not just in beliefs but also in how they look. Like I said, I am myself an atheist but I will never not be ascribed a muslim identity, at least here in the Netherlands, just on the basis of my looks and my arabic name. Islamophobia and racism are quite intimately linked.

This has always been an aggravating sticking point with me- the outright refusal to acknowledge a racial connection within Islamic criticism. Even if progressives want to forcefully steer the conversation back strictly to the theological and philosophical arguments which theoretically apply to even white people, you cannot deny the real world demographics of those whom those arguments apply, and subsequently you cannot deny the threats and violence that have happen to non-Islamic and non-religious peoples due to their appearance as a stereotypical "Muslim" in culture and the media. I don't take seriously people who get upset at progressives for upholding social justice principles at the expense of hard conversations and solutions to the issue of Islamic and Christian/secular coexistence if they turn a blind eye to who's more likely to get singled out by that angry white Fox watcher as a "terrorist" at the end of the day.

Instead of people being so upset about our stumbling through our flawed but good intentions legal systems, why not go after the places where Sharia Law, honour killings and jailing of people is seen on mass? There is always so many faux-liberals going all out on the terrible Western culture and it being "unfair". Where are they all when we mention the likes of Saudi Arabia?

Does it need to be reiterated that Saudi Arabia is a fucked up place in terms of the rights of religious, gender, and sexual minorities? You might as well ask where are all the liberals crying about North Korea. I don't think anyone disagrees with this. However, seems to me that the reason the West, and particularly America, are more likely to get called out on being terrible and unfair is because there is a patented effort on part of those in power to deny and ignore the horrific violence and disenfranchisement that past and present forms of colonization and white supremacy have wracked on the Wests' most vulnerable citizens. The "winners" get to write the history and all that, but it's harder for the winners to have an unmitigated monopoly on that when black and brown folks get their hands on the Internet. So due to its proposition as a culture of meritocracy and righteousness without any reasonable attempt to reconcile its sins, the West simply makes itself a bigger target for the people living in it.

 

[Audioboxer]

This has always been an aggravating sticking point with me- the outright refusal to acknowledge a racial connection within Islamic criticism. Even if progressives want to forcefully steer the conversation back strictly to the theological and philosophical arguments which theoretically apply to even white people, you cannot deny the real world demographics of those whom those arguments apply, and subsequently you cannot deny the threats and violence that have happen to non-Islamic and non-religious peoples due to their appearance as a stereotypical "Muslim" in culture and the media. I don't take seriously people who get upset at progressives for upholding social justice principles at the expense of hard conversations and solutions to the issue of Islamic and Christian/secular coexistence if they turn a blind eye to who's more likely to get singled out by that angry white Fox watcher as a "terrorist" at the end of the day.



Does it need to be reiterated that Saudi Arabia is a fucked up place in terms of the rights of religious, gender, and sexual minorities? You might as well ask where are all the liberals crying about North Korea. I don't think anyone disagrees with this. However, seems to me that the reason the West, and particularly America, are more likely to get called out on being terrible and unfair is because there is a patented effort on part of those in power to deny and ignore the horrific violence and disenfranchisement that past and present forms of colonization and white supremacy have wracked on the Wests' most vulnerable citizens. The "winners" get to write the history and all that, but it's harder for the winners to have an unmitigated monopoly on that when black and brown folks get their hands on the Internet.

Unlike a slew of Americans who now think they actually live in Saudi Arabia I would say the west as a collective has been doing fairly decently for a while. Most of what we have been fighting for has been coming into play. Therefore I find it incredibly disheartening when liberals want to chuck all of us under the bus. We are far from perfect but for the most part you and I get to enjoy many freedoms some only dream of. I say to thee leave your country that supports many freedoms including speech and go live somewhere truly oppressive for a raincheck. Never want your place of birth to be like that? Do a better damn job of talking about oppression and freedoms well before they get taken away or infringed on.

Brexit and Trump are what happens when the liberals get lazy and in recent times want to handwave crazy shit because having serious discussions about serious matters is hard, or we don't want to be called names. The right doesn't give two shits about being called names. We never want to be like that but we don't want to be so obsessed with self image we don't do any dirty work. I've pointed out in here already what happens when we behave like that. We get the Rotherham cover up. We get the bigotry of low expectations. And finally, we get the slow erosion of our own societies, either to far right parties or co-living with an incredible amount of shit hidden behind "freedom of religion". Dislike the amount of shit the right hide behind "freedom of speech"? Well some of us feel the same way about oppressive Religious ideologies. Often they are far more dangerous than just nasty speech as well. Think being called names is rough? Try having your clitoris cut off/vagina sewen shut and then being resigned to live in a bin bag with a full face covering for your whole life. Or being told you cannot drive a car because you are a women.

 

[Pusherman]

Fact of the mater is though we have and will continue to legislate against religious expression when it over steps certain values. What happens in America if you refuse to as a state stop gay marriage hand outs? You get in legal trouble. It doesn't matter if you are a Christian. As many others say all the time you also get asked over here to remove full face coverings in high security areas. Reject doing so? You'll be ejected if not have the police called on you.

Like it or not culturally we do make up rules and laws. Some of them outside strict government intervention, but they still happen. Invisible laws I quite smartly seen them referred to in here. It's our flawed but humanly attempted way to prioritise what is healthy and what is oppressive in society. There is a lot of psychological elements to this, one of which is an evolutionary human distrust of not being able to see a face at all and its social cues. This is incredibly harmful to assimilation as well. We are a social species. Suppress that and you suffer.

Instead of people being so upset about our stumbling through our flawed but good intentions legal systems, why not go after the places where Sharia Law, honour killings and jailing of people is seen on mass? There is always so many faux-liberals going all out on the terrible Western culture and it being "unfair". Where are they all when we mention the likes of Saudi Arabia? Well I guess if they think it's Islamophobic for a Western country to try and prioritise its values they aren't even going to touch a country like that in fear of looking hypocritical.

So... I guess you've moved away from the whole 'it's about the poor oppressed women' argument. You know, all that talk about cultural norms and humanity being a social species is quite nice but do I think as a progressive that 'evolutionary human distrust' should ever serve as a basis for banning a foreign religious garment... no, not at all.

And I am upset about the legal system in the west being used to curtail women's freedoms and punish conservative muslims because I live in the west and am currently having a discussion in a thread about a western country. I actually do have heated discussions about Saudi Arabia and the Middle East quite often, when I am talking to people from those places or discussing those areas in the first place. Not mixing those discussions and keeping to the topic doesn't make me a faux-liberal, it makes me an honest one.

And finally about your example of a state discriminating against gay marriages. That clearly hurts gay people whereas a face-veil is purely personal expression. To keep to the US as an example: I am delighted that the US has finally reached a place where it is no longer politically acceptable to fly the confederate flag on government grounds. That doesn't mean that I think the confederate flag should be banned completely. I believe anyone proudly showing it is almost certainly a horrible racist but I also understand and respect that my personal opinion isn't grounds for limiting that person's freedom of expression.

I can imagine scenarios where showing one's face is necessary and obligating people to do so in those situations isn't wrong at all in my opinion. But I take people's freedom very seriously so I don't see why those few situations suddenly mean that a face-veil should be banned everywhere/most places.

 

[Audioboxer]

So... I guess you've moved away from the whole 'it's about the poor oppressed women' argument. You know, all that talk about cultural norms and humanity being a social species is quite nice but do I think as a progressive that 'evolutionary human distrust' should ever serve as a basis for banning a foreign religious garment... no, not at all.

And I am upset about the legal system in the west being used to curtail women's freedoms and punish conservative muslims because I live in the west and am currently having a discussion in a thread about a western country. I actually do have heated discussions about Saudi Arabia and the Middle East quite often, when I am talking to people from those places or discussing those areas in the first place. Not mixing those discussions and keeping to the topic doesn't make me a faux-liberal, it makes me an honest one.

And finally about your example of a state discriminating against gay marriages. That clearly hurts gay people whereas a face-veil is purely personal expression. To keep to the US as an example: I am delighted that the US has finally reached a place where it is no longer politically acceptable to fly the confederate flag on government grounds. That doesn't mean that I think the confederate flag should be banned completely. I believe anyone proudly showing it is almost certainly a horrible racist but I also understand and respect that my personal opinion isn't grounds for limiting that person's freedom of expression.

I can imagine scenarios where showing one's face is necessary and obligating people to do so in those situations isn't wrong at all in my opinion. But I take people's freedom very seriously so I don't see why those few situations suddenly mean that a face-veil should be banned everywhere/most places.

If this mean you are happy if Government then bans full face covering in Government funded or owned buildings, then that is what Merkel actually said. A ban where it can be made illegal. The government in Germany won't be able to make it illegal everywhere, or at least it would be incredibly hard to. Mainly due to a lot of the freedom principals we have in the West.

A full face covering is more of an objective risk than a confederate flag, as well as I said above destructive to socialising. Funny you should bring it up though, it was judged on due to what it represents. You have a poor understanding of the burqa if you think it just represents freedom of dress code/expression.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Do you really think that anyone is wearing a burqa as a fashion statement in day to day life instead of out of cultural or religious reason? I find that very, very, very hard to believe.

I didn't say it wasn't for religious reasons. You agree that someone can be Muslim and feminist at the same time, right?

Read and watch some of the interviews posted in this thread. People's reason for wearing the burqa are varied.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131011-hijab-ban-turkey-islamic-headscarf-ataturk/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KpvAtqwYbA
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=226174469&postcount=630

I am a pragmatic above all else. If it turns out a burka ban does not help in reducing radicalization and making women more free from their oppressive communities, then I would oppose the ban even though I would support it on principle. I haven't seen enough evidence either way, yet.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=226174469&postcount=630
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban_on_face_covering#Implementation

No one talked about throwing people in jail, did they? Anyway, that woman is an idiot.

They're already fined and thrown in re-education camps for wearing it. Why not throw them in jail if they continue to oppress themselves?

"That woman is an idiot". That's an ad-hominem, and I don't know what you expect me to say other than to throw another ad-hominem back or to invoke the mansplaining card, all of which I'd rather not do.

....................

Fuck this. I can't deal with such a staggering amount of ignorance.

I have a question for you, since you said you wouldn't support a hijab ban in this thread. What is the actual difference? Can't a woman be forced to wear a hijab as well? Isn't the only reason anyone would wear it because they're brainwashed to believe in their religion? Why is one acceptable and the other one not?

The burka calls for the oppression, dehumanization, and subjugation of women. It was invented for that very purpose, and is still used for that purpose today. It is absolutely a valid comparison.

Even if it did all those things, it does not call for violence and murder against anybody, unlike Nazism. The comparison is silly, and is a common sign of when someone has no argument left.

 

[Pusherman]

If this mean you are happy if Government then bans full face covering in Government funded or owned buildings, then that is what Merkel actually said. A ban where it can be made illegal. The government in Germany won't be able to make it illegal everywhere, or at least it would be incredibly hard to. Mainly due to a lot of the freedom principals we have in the West.

A full face covering is more of an objective risk than a confederate flag, as well as I said above destructive to socialising. Funny you should bring it up though, it was judged on due to what it represents. You have a poor understanding of the burqa if you think it just represents freedom of dress code/expression.

First of all, the confederate flag was an expression by the government whereas a burka or niqab is the expression of an individual.

But I think it is the bolded that is our main source of disagreement. I am saying that you don't get to decide what the burka means. The women wearing it get to do that for themselves. Every single one of them gets to decide for themselves why it is she is wearing the burka and what it means. Your opinion, the opinion of the majority of people and even the opinion of other muslim women do not matter. Only her opinion matters. So how about you actually listen to what they have to say.

 

[Audioboxer]

Funny story about ISIS and burqas from September.

The Islamic State group has reportedly banned women from wearing a burka, a veil that covers the entire face, as a security precaution in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul. The alleged new rule is striking in part because the militant group also known as ISIS has beaten and killed women in the past for refusing to wear the conservative garment.

Militant leaders banned burqas after a group of veiled women carried out attacks against several ISIS commanders, according to media reports Tuesday. Women wearing burqas will no longer be allowed to enter buildings in Mosul, an ISIS stronghold, while wearing the full-body covering. Instead, they must wear gloves and gauze to cover their eyes. ISIS' morality police will continue to require women to wear the burqa outside of Mosul's new security rule, the Jerusalem Post reported

But yeah, when it's a requirement of ISIS you start looking at why, and what it represents.

Also

While burqas are mandatory in Iran and Saudi Arabia, some Muslim-majority nations have also debated banning face veils to protect national security. In Syria, officials banned veils from universities in 2010, while a proposed veil ban in Tunisia in 2015 prompted a national outcry, Quartz reported.

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/isis-forbids-women-wearing-burqas-125129119.html

Better tell the Islamic countries they are being Islamophobic for pondering national security. Don't they just know it's a symbol of expression? Those chaps in ISIS have it right. A demand of expression is all. *sigh*

 

[Nepenthe]

Unlike a slew of Americans who now think they actually live in Saudi Arabia I would say the west as a collective has been doing fairly decently for a while. Most of what we have been fighting for has been coming into play. Therefore I find it incredibly disheartening when liberals want to chuck all of us under the bus. We are far from perfect but for the most part you and I get to enjoy many freedoms some only dream of. I say to thee leave your country that supports many freedoms including speech and go live somewhere truly oppressive for a raincheck. Never want your place of birth to be like that? Do a better damn job of talking about oppression and freedoms well before they get taken away or infringed on.

I'm not sure why you're giving me the classic "If you don't like it, then leave" excuse when I've already agreed that Saudi Arabia is a pretty fucked-up place to live in comparison outside of an unwillingness to take another mirror onto yourself. There being worse places in the world doesn't mean people suffering in better places need to suck it up the until those places are fixed. This is literally the same attitude that partly fueled the "white lash" that got Trump elected in the first place, and ultimately all that does is lead to perpetual inaction, and the West is (supposedly) better than that. We can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Also, far from perfect is an understatement. My people are slaughtered and caged up for basically nothing every day, and their killers and jailers get off scot free because they happen to be wearing a specific uniform that white people have a love affair with. There is a centuries' long history of treating my people like animals for free labor, scientific experimentation, animal bait, and entertainment, along with the destruction and erosion of the little wealth of rights we do have, with which white people claim they cannot make up to us because "it's too hard/too much money."

Yeah, it's nice to have some of the privileges of western society, like this computer I'm typing this on within this comfortable house that my hardworking parents have sustained for me, but at the end of the day I don't owe much blinding respect to a country and society that ultimately doesn't love me all that much for how I was born. ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

Brexit and Trump are what happens when the liberals get lazy and in recent times want to handwave crazy shit because having serious discussions about serious matters is hard, or we don't want to be called names. The right doesn't give two shits about being called names. We never want to be like that but we don't want so obsessed with self image we don't do any dirty work. I've pointed out in here already what happens when we behave like that. We get the Rotherham cover up. We get the bigotry of low expectations. And finally, we get the slow erosion of our own societies, either to far right parties or co-living with an incredible amount of shit hidden behind "freedom of religion". Dislike the amount of shit the right hide behind "freedom of speech"? Well some of us feel the same way about oppressive Religious ideologies.

No, Brexit and Trump are what happens when fair-weather, intellectually-dishonest white centrists and anarchic progressives who didn't get their dreamboat candidate equate both sides as having perfectly equal social value and thus don't show up to vote. I don't really find this perfectly equatable to the issue of racism's place within Islamic criticism, nor do I feel like I need this lecture because I showed up half an hour early and voted for an entirely Democratic ticket in Georgia of all places. Regardless, while I dislike the amount of shit the right hides behind "freedom of speech" (although they are more frequently shown to not actually know what the first amendment entails which is why I love when they get banned from private platforms and fired from their jobs), I nonetheless respect their right to say it, mainly due to the aforementioned private and social consequences in place to fuck them over constantly. However, this I also don't find all that relevant because I personally haven't said how I even feel about the whole burqa debate in regards to religious freedom, but I'll elaborate:

I have absolutely no fucking idea about the burqa and its ramifications in society. My ignorance thus pushes me to want to say this is a fight for Muslim women to wage and not little ol' me in an entirely different country from where this ban is being proposed. As a philosophical exercise, I feel like people should be able to wear whatever they want on public grounds, and thus I wouldn't be for a ban on that front. If the issue isn't about freedom of expression through dress, but is instead the fact that the burqa is used as an oppressive tool within certain Islamic societies, I don't actually see how a ban on the tool in this instance is a long-term solution so much as a band-aid on a symptom of Islamic oppression of women because you would not be able to regulate private use of it without breaking laws and fundamental rights to privacy, nor is it- I would think- the only way in which women are controlled in these cultures (upbringing, marriage, sex, etc.). I think a more practical solution to the issue of Islamic-based misogyny would be wider-sweeping issues to rescue and support women and prosecute and punish oppressive men within law, although again I'm ignorant of specifics because I know shit about salafism. So ban it on that reasoning if you want, but I don't think it'll do much towards solving the issue. From the outside looking in, it just seems like a symbolic gesture.

 

[Audioboxer]

I'm not sure why you're giving me the classic "If you don't like it, then leave" excuse when I've already agreed that Saudi Arabia is a pretty fucked-up place to live in comparison outside of an unwillingness to take another mirror onto yourself. There being worse places in the world doesn't mean people suffering in better places need to suck it up the until those places are fixed. This is literally the same attitude that partly fueled the "white lash" that got Trump elected in the first place, and ultimately all that does is lead to perpetual inaction, and the West is (supposedly) better than that. We can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Also, far from perfect is an understatement. My people are slaughtered and caged up for basically nothing every day, and their killers and jailers get off scot free because they happen to be wearing a specific uniform that white people have a love affair with. There is a centuries' long history of treating my people like animals for free labor, scientific experimentation, animal bait, and entertainment, along with the destruction and erosion of the little wealth of rights we do have, with which white people claim they cannot make up to us because "it's too hard/too much money."

Yeah, it's nice to have some of the privileges of western society, like this computer I'm typing this on within this comfortable house that my hardworking parents have sustained for me, but at the end of the day I don't owe much blinding respect to a country and society that ultimately doesn't love me all that much for how I was born. ¯_(&#12484_/¯



No, Brexit and Trump are what happens when fair-weather, intellectually-dishonest white centrists and anarchic progressives who didn't get their dreamboat candidate equate both sides as having perfectly equal social value and thus don't show up to vote. I don't really find this perfectly equatable to the issue of racism's place within Islamic criticism, nor do I feel like I need this lecture because I showed up half an hour early and voted for an entirely Democratic ticket in Georgia of all places. Regardless, while I dislike the amount of shit the right hides behind "freedom of speech" (although they are more frequently shown to not actually know what the first amendment entails which is why I love when they get banned from private platforms and fired from their jobs), I nonetheless respect their right to say it, mainly due to the aforementioned private and social consequences in place to fuck them over constantly. However, this I also don't find all that relevant because I personally haven't said how I even feel about the whole burqa debate in regards to religious freedom, but I'll elaborate:

I have absolutely no fucking idea about the burqa and its ramifications in society. My ignorance thus pushes me to want to say this is a fight for Muslim women to wage and not little ol' me in an entirely different country from where this ban is being proposed. As a philosophical exercise, I feel like people should be able to wear whatever they want on public grounds, and thus I wouldn't be for a ban on that front. If the issue isn't about freedom of expression through dress, but is instead the fact that the burqa is used as an oppressive tool within certain Islamic societies, I don't actually see how a ban on the tool in this instance is a long-term solution so much as a band-aid on a symptom of Islamic oppression of women because you would not be able to regulate private use of it without breaking laws and fundamental rights to privacy, nor is it- I would think- the only way in which women are controlled in these cultures (upbringing, marriage, sex, etc.). I think a more practical solution to the issue of Islamic-based misogyny would be wider-sweeping issues to rescue and support women and prosecute and punish oppressive men within law, although again I'm ignorant of specifics because I know shit about salafism. So ban it on that reasoning if you want, but I don't think it'll do much towards solving the issue. From the outside looking in, it just seems like a symbolic gesture.

Fair enough but you entered a topic on the burqa and a lot of the Western arguments are related to it and the freedoms we enjoy to try and show how badly many women are oppressed who get forced to wear it, or have to as the alternative is of serious consequences to their well-being. This isn't suppose to be a Trump or Brexit topic, that's just really my side views for the rise of the right. Islamic beliefs and extremism do unfortunately tie into those two things. We'll just have to agree to disagree on our views of what the left has failed with to allow the right into power on more than one occasion now.

 

[Nepenthe]

Fair enough but you entered a topic on the burqa and a lot of the Western arguments are related to it and the freedoms we enjoy to try and show how badly many women are oppressed who get forced to wear it, or have to a be he alternative is of serious consequences to their well-being. This isn't suppose to be a Trump or Brexit topic, that's just really my side views for the rise of the right. Islamic beliefs and extremism do unfortunately tie into those two things. We'll just have to agree to disagree on our views of what the left has failed with to allow the right into power on more than one occasion now.

I entered the topic to primarily address an issue someone had about racism in Islamic criticism, and then I saw your point complaining about liberals seemingly not being present for criticism of Saudi Arabia (which I'd like to see receipts on, because, I mean, who is sticking up for LGBT youth over there- conservatives? lo-fuckin-l) in lieu of always bashing the West (they deserve it), which is inherently a disingenuous argument regardless of the original subject matter that anyone regardless of burqa knowledge can address.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Because their culture is well-known to be pretty fucking misogynistic?

"Their culture"? Can you elaborate? I hope you don't mean to say because of the country they're from, whatever they do is misogynistic.

 

[KRod-57]

I'm Muslim but not a fan of the niqab or burka at all. I honestly don't like it at all, but there are people who choose to wear it out of their own volition.

Not sure how to feel honestly.

It's not always about how you feel, it is about individual choice. That means allowing people to make choices that you or I might not like or agree with

 

[Audioboxer]

I entered the topic to primarily address an issue someone had about racism in Islamic criticism, and then I saw your point complaining about liberals seemingly not being present for criticism of Saudi Arabia (which I'd like to see receipts on, because, I mean, who is sticking up for LGBT youth over there- conservatives? lo-fuckin-l) in lieu of always bashing the West (they deserve it), which is inherently a disingenuous argument regardless of the original subject matter that anyone regardless of burqa knowledge can address.

Okay fair enough again, but as I said at the end of that post we'll just have to agree to disagree. The reasons I think the left is partly failing obviously aren't reasons you agree with. Many others don't agree with me either, but I think I have enough objective evidence to believe some behaviour on the left is indeed causing the place to turn into a minefield.

 

[Nepenthe]

Okay fair enough again, but as I said at the end of that post we'll just have to agree to disagree. The reasons I think the left is partly failing obviously aren't reasons you agree with. Many others don't agree with me either, but I think I have enough objective evidence to believe some behaviour on the left is indeed causing the place to turn into a minefield.

I'm not that much of an ass-kisser of the left. I think there's things we need to work on too, so I don't inherently disagree with the concept that our framing and language of the issue of Islamic integration has had negative consequences. But at the same time, I don't think this realization means we need to stop calling out America for killing black people until Saudi Arabia is better, nor does it mean we need to keep peddling this disingenuous Dawkinsian argument that Islamic criticism has absolutely nothing to do with race when it seems like only brown Muslims- and even brown people who aren't Muslim- are getting the short end of the stick from all sides.

 

[Audioboxer]

I'm not that much of an ass-kisser of the left. I think there's things we need to work on too, so I don't inherently disagree with the concept that our framing and language of the issue of Islamic integration has had negative consequences. But at the same time, I don't think this realization means we need to stop calling out America for killing black people until Saudi Arabia is better, nor does it mean we need to keep peddling this disingenuous Dawkinsian argument that Islamic criticism has absolutely nothing to do with race when it seems like only brown Muslims- and even brown people who aren't Muslim- are getting the short end of the stick from all sides.

What the what? I never said anything that crazy. I was speaking purely from the perspective of if you think the West is marginalising Muslims go and visit Saudi Arabia to see true oppression. I tried to tie that into saying as imperfect as we are we have fought hard to try and improve our societies and no we don't see the majority of what goes on there. Yes we have problems, which you've just highlighted, but I wasn't addressing black people in America. At least on that note we can have open discussion, dissent and we are attempting to force change. Can you imagine how well a black lives matter movement would do in some Islamic states? The same places who kill atheist bloggers? I mean maybe change it to something to do with women's lives matter. You get my jist though.

A lot of Western countries aren't perfect, but we are doing okay overall. We are allowing many to come in from more objectively flawed countries, and okay we are trying to help them flee. Issue is if they do absolutely nothing to assimilate and then think they have a right to try and bring over their previous counties backwards ways of thinking, we should as we do with other matters in the west be able to challenge it. Education is failing though, many can't be reached due to insular communities and as I've spoken about in here already others won't try and change out of fear of their own safety.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

A legitimate concern, I agree. I don't think the status quo is acceptable though.

I feel 'we should ban Muslims from entering the country "until we can figure out what's going on"' comes from the same place as this. I'm sure none of us agree with that statement, but that's also an example of an ineffective solution that was to be implemented to give the appearance of 'doing something'. We shouldn't accept bad solutions just because they make it look like we're doing something about it.

I hope people look at the potential negative consequences of what they're proposing.

 

[Audioboxer]

I feel 'we should ban Muslims from entering the country "until we can figure out what's going on"' comes from the same place as this. I'm sure none of us agree with that statement, but that's also an example of an ineffective solution that was to be implemented to give the appearance of 'doing something'. We shouldn't accept bad solutions just because they make it look like we're doing something about it.

I hope people look at the potential negative consequences of what they're proposing.

I really do not think considering or even implementing bans on full face coverings in certain places is the same as stopping all Muslims entering a country. It's this kind of deflection nonsense that is giving the left a bad name.

How do you feel above that Syria banned the burqa in Universities? Or that other actual Islamic countries can consider it a security risk? This is often where people on the left collapse in on themselves as to be as hard as they are on Germany can't translate to them being equally as hard on say Syria, as either bigotry of low expectations, or fear of being Islamophobic for criticising Syria.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

I really do not think considering or even implementing bans on full face coverings in certain places is equitable to stopping all Muslims entering a country. It's this kind of deflection nonsense that is giving the left a bad name.

How do you feel above that Syria banned the burqa in Universities?

I didn't say it was the same. Read the post again. I'm addressing the appearance of looking like you're doing something, even if what you're doing is actually ineffective or detrimental to what you're trying to ultimately achieve.

Syria oppresses women in many ways. Seeing them oppress them further by banning many from attending universities is par for the course.

Or that other actual Islamic countries can consider it a security risk?

ISIS bans and regulates women's clothing as they please, and I don't support it.

This is often where people on the left collapse in on themselves as to be as hard as they are on Germany can't translate to them being equally as hard on say Syria, as either bigotry of low expectations, or fear of being Islamophobic for criticising Syria.

I'm ex-Muslim so I don't really care who calls me Islamophobic or whatever. I haven't called anyone in here Islamophobic either, because I don't think anyone I've replied to genuinely is.

 

[Audioboxer]

I didn't say it was the same. Read the post again. I'm addressing the appearance of looking like you're doing something, even if what you're doing is actually ineffective or detrimental to what you're trying to ultimately achieve.

Syria oppresses women in many ways. Seeing them oppress them further by banning many from attending universities is par for the course.

You don't see the irony though in an Islamic country banning full face coverings? Or security risks being mentioned?

Syria banned the burqa from Universities, not women. Other atrocities they may commit aren't relevant to the point here. It is about full face coverings in highly secure public or private areas being banned.

Speaking of Syria, what is your thoughts on these women?

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/mi...-freed-from-isis-manbij-sdf-a7173671.html?amp

Isis forces women to wear the burqa, which covers the entire body apart from the eyes, as part of its interpretation of Sharia law.

The terrorist group has founded groups of “morality police” who brutally enforce the dress code and other restrictions inflicted on women, who are forbidden from leaving the home without a male guardian.

I mean it's just an expression of their freedom right? Those women shouldn't be so happy to be tearing it off. Should they?

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

You don't see the irony though in an Islamic country banning full face coverings? Or security risks being mentioned?

Syria banned the burqa from Universities, not women. Other atrocities they may commit aren't relevant to the point here. It is about full face coverings in highly secure public or private areas being banned.

No, not really. Syria is not exactly "Islamic" i.e. theocratic. It's purportedly secular, and also authoritarian. Banning burqas makes a lot of sense for them.

And yes, it is banning, or at least discouraging many women from attending university.

1) Women who wear a burqa because of their religious devotion will be hesitant to head off to university.
2) Families who force women in their household to wear a burqa will not let them go to university, this hurts only the woman in question.

If I wanted to use a beacon example of a country that is progressive for women's rights (or human rights in general), Syria doesn't exactly stand out.

 

[Audioboxer]

No, not really. Syria is not exactly "Islamic" i.e. theocratic. It's purportedly secular, and also authoritarian. Banning burqas makes a lot of sense for them.

And yes, it is banning, or at least discouraging many women from attending university.

1) Women who wear a burqa because of their religious devotion will be hesitant to head off to university.
2) Families who force women in their household to wear a burqa will not let them go to university, this hurts only the woman in question.

If I wanted to use a beacon example of a country that is progressive for women's rights (or human rights in general), Syria doesn't exactly stand out.

Good thing that is not what I said. If I were doing that I'd probably pick a European country, or even America (most parts of it anyway).

The irony is even in countries where Islam actually is the dominant religion it can still be contested. Throw in the dash of ISIS as they use it as a tool of oppression and you have a great web to untangle to be taken seriously saying it's some expression of freedom in the face of it being used as an oppressive tool which leads to beatings and killings. When women that have been forced to wear it under threat of their life tear it off its probably worthwhile considering what they think of the whole outfit and it's represention of their apparent freedom.

 

[Pusherman]

Good thing that is not what I said. If I were doing that I'd probably pick a European country, or even America (most parts of it anyway).

The irony is even in countries where Islam actually is the dominant religion it can still be contested. Throw in the dash of ISIS as they use it as a tool of oppression and you have a great web to untangle to be taken seriously saying it's some expression of freedom in the face of it being used as an oppressive tool which leads to beatings and killings.

Dude don't you get it. ISIS or autocratic despots in Islamic countries or Arab monarchs also do not get to decide why some women voluntarily wear a face-veil. What I'm saying is so, so simple. There are women telling you why they wear a face-veil. How can it be in their, or any women, interest to ignore those women? There are plenty of people, muslim or otherwise, that oppose the wearing of a face-veil but that does not mean that the people actually wearing it should be silenced. We don't live under mob rule. Listen to those women. Hear what they have to say. Take them seriously as human beings. Consider if limiting their freedom, the actual real freedom of those women that will be curtailed by a burka ban, is necessary, beneficial and progressive. Those women are defending their freedom of expression, give them the respect they deserve and at least consider their arguments. Limiting the tangible freedom of people shouldn't be done willy-nilly or as a symbolic gesture or as a cheap political move. And it certainly shouldn't be done without actual engaging with the women involved first.

If all you have to say to those women is that they are idiots, as one poster actually did earlier in the thread, don't be surprised if I don't believe you when you say that you have the interests of those women in mind with a ban like this.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/mi...-freed-from-isis-manbij-sdf-a7173671.html?amp

I mean it's just an expression of their freedom right? Those women shouldn't be so happy to be tearing it off. Should they?

I think it's absolutely beautiful what they're doing.

I've been consistent: I support the women's right to choose what they want to wear. In ISIS where they are forced to wear burqa, I'll be against it. If their families are forcing them to wear a burqa, I'll be against it. If their governments are forcing them to take off their burqa, I'll be against that too.

The burqa predates ISIS by thousands of years. Many of the women in Germany you're trying to ban from wearing the burqa have never stepped foot in ISIS or any country that forces women to wear a burqa. I have a feeling if you talked to some of these women or heard them out, you wouldn't be so quick to think that they're all forced to wear it.

Good thing that is not what I said. If I were doing that I'd probably pick a European country, or even America (most parts of it anyway).

The irony is even in countries where Islam actually is the dominant religion it can still be contested. Throw in the dash of ISIS as they use it as a tool of oppression and you have a great web to untangle to be taken seriously saying it's some expression of freedom in the face of it being used as an oppressive tool which leads to beatings and killings. When women that have been forced to wear it under threat of their life tear it off its probably worthwhile considering what they think of the whole outfit and it's represention of their apparent freedom.

It's not that ironic, at least not the examples you listed. I can see how it can be ironic if you generalize the entire Islamic World as one theocratic blob, but that's not how reality is. Syria, as I've mentioned, is secular-authoritarian, a burqa ban aligns perfectly well with their ideology. Tunisia is an ex-French colony (France of banning burqa in 2010 for laïcité fame), and was also secular-authoritarian until the Arab Spring. In the subsequent elections after the Jasmine Reovlution, the people voted in the same secular-authoritarian party that was governing them before the Arab Spring. They proposed the same type of legislation that they would have proposed before, and are now experiencing backlash. As far as I know, their burqa ban hasn't been implemented yet.

These women who were forced to wear the burqa don't just hate the burqa for it being a burqa, they hate how it was used against them: controlling women and how they dress. While I can understand the cost-benefit analysis that can go into banning the burqa in a country where the burqa is extremely prevalent and there are strong social, historical or legal pressures to conform, Germany, where only a few hundred people wear a burqa is fundamentally a different beast.

 

[Audioboxer]

Dude don't you get it. ISIS or autocratic despots in Islamic countries or Arab monarchs also do not get to decide why some women voluntarily wear a face-veil. What I'm saying is so, so simple. There are women telling you why they wear a face-veil. How can it be in their, or any women, interest to ignore those women? There are plenty of people, muslim or otherwise, that oppose the wearing of a face-veil but that does not mean that the people actually wearing it should be silenced. We don't live under mob rule. Listen to those women. Hear what they have to say. Take them seriously as human beings. Consider if limiting their freedom, the actual real freedom of those women that will be curtailed by a burka ban, is necessary, beneficial and progressive. Those women are defending their freedom of expression, give them the respect they deserve and at least consider their arguments. Limiting the tangible freedom of people shouldn't be done willy-nilly or as a symbolic gesture or as a cheap political move. And it certainly shouldn't be done without actual engaging with the women involved first.

If all you have to say to those women is that they are idiots, as one poster actually did earlier in the thread, don't be surprised if I don't believe you when you say that you have the interests of those women in mind with a ban like this.

I haven't called those women idiots. I've spoke about how powerful indoctrination is and what it can do to people. If it weren't for the Quran and Islamic teaching how many women would wear the clothing they do in 40 degree heat and exempt themselves from any meaningful interaction with another human being via body language? Heck there is a lot of women out there who probably truly believe their male counterpart is superior. Should I listen to them? Sure, but I'm going to challenge that line of thinking.

I love how you frame it that if you don't agree with these women it must mean you just aren't engaging with them, listening or respecting them. Most of us do weigh up both arguments before thinking for ourselves. Merkel most certainly has been engaging as well, as is Germany. Who else has taken in more refugees? Not every decision you decide is for the greater good is going to make everyone happy. See plenty of decisions in the West the Christian right goes apeshit over.

 

[Krev]

Wearing the veil can be surprisingly empowering, says Litt. In recalling how she adopted the niqab gradually over time, moving from loose-fitting clothing to a headscarf to occasionally wearing the niqab to becoming a full-time wearer as her relationship with her faith evolved, she spoke of the first time she sat down to talk with a man while wearing the veil: "I thought: Wow! This is liberating. He is having to listen to my words, not judge me by my clothes or my face, but paying attention purely to what I have to say."

What an incredibly shitty view of the world.

 

[Etrian Oddity]

The whole "She agrees to it, so it's not oppressive!" argument always screamed STOCKHOLM SYNDROME to me....

Fully support Merkel on this one.

In a cosmopolitan world, you are free to practice whichever religion you want. But we don't live in the stone ages anymore, and I think it's pretty silly -- for this forum, as an example -- to make huge uproars over things as silly as Street Fighter V's female video game characters as sexist and misogynistic when you have real-life examples like the burqa or hijab that are instantly hand-waved away as symbols of female oppression. It's baffling. It's archaic and shameful, and I'll eat crow if I'm wrong on this, but I guarantee that a ton of women who "accept" or prefer to wear a burqa were conditioned from childhood and indoctrinated into thinking it was a symbol of "strength."

 

[pigeon]

The whole "She agrees to it, so it's not oppressive!" argument always screamed STOCKHOLM SYNDROME to me....

Fully support Merkel on this one.

In a cosmopolitan world, you are free to practice whichever religion you want. But we don't live in the stone ages anymore, and I think it's pretty silly -- for this forum, as an example -- to make huge uproars over things as silly as Street Fighter V's female video game characters as sexist and misogynistic when you have real-life examples like the burqa or hijab that are instantly hand-waved away as symbols of female oppression. It's baffling. It's archaic and shameful, and I'll eat crow if I'm wrong on this, but I guarantee that a ton of women who "accept" or prefer to wear a burqa were conditioned from childhood and indoctrinated into thinking it was a symbol of "strength."

This has actually been talked about repeatedly in this thread. It's called "choice feminism," and it's an complicated and active topic in feminist discussion.

It is not actually a brand new idea, although many people in this thread seem to think it is. But that's not too surprising, because the people talking at length in this thread about sexism and repression don't seem to ever turn up to discuss feminism in other threads. In fact, they keep making comments, as you did above, that reveal that they actually think the things feminists think are problematic are actually silly and pointless. Which explains why they don't know that much about the topic!

It's almost as if these people care about feminism only for, and explicitly for the purpose of, arguing about how bad Islam is and how it should be restricted by the state.

 

[azyless]

The whole "She agrees to it, so it's not oppressive!" argument always screamed STOCKHOLM SYNDROME to me....

Fully support Merkel on this one.

In a cosmopolitan world, you are free to practice whichever religion you want. But we don't live in the stone ages anymore, and I think it's pretty silly -- for this forum, as an example -- to make huge uproars over things as silly as Street Fighter V's female video game characters as sexist and misogynistic when you have real-life examples like the burqa or hijab that are instantly hand-waved away as symbols of female oppression. It's baffling. It's archaic and shameful, and I'll eat crow if I'm wrong on this, but I guarantee that a ton of women who "accept" or prefer to wear a burqa were conditioned from childhood and indoctrinated into thinking it was a symbol of "strength."

For this new generation of "feminism" yeah no doubt. Wearing one of the most obvious form of female oppression has somehow become fighting the patriarchy or something.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...&postcount=630
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French...Implementation

Thanks, I'll read those.

They're already fined and thrown in re-education camps for wearing it. Why not throw them in jail if they continue to oppress themselves?

Because that's going too far? But don't let that stop you from piling on the straw I suppose.

"That woman is an idiot". That's an ad-hominem,

Nah, it's just an insult. xD

She is, though. It's called cutting off your nose to spite your face, and that's exactly what she's doing.

and I don't know what you expect me to say other than to throw another ad-hominem back or to invoke the mansplaining card, all of which I'd rather not do.

......... omg are you fucking serious xD

I have a question for you, since you said you wouldn't support a hijab ban in this thread. What is the actual difference? Can't a woman be forced to wear a hijab as well? Isn't the only reason anyone would wear it because they're brainwashed to believe in their religion? Why is one acceptable and the other one not?

Hijabs are not dehumanizing and oppressive the ways burkas are? Duh.

Even if it did all those things, it does not call for violence and murder against anybody, unlike Nazism. The comparison is silly, and is a common sign of when someone has no argument left.

So if I wore a t-shirt with anti-Semitic rhetoric without calling for violence, that wouldn't make me a nazi? Please. There's a reason a lot of people object to the term "alt right" vs "neo nazi", even if many alt-righters are not calling for violence.

For this new generation of "feminism" yeah no doubt. Wearing one of the most obvious form of female oppression has somehow become fighting the patriarchy or something.

Cutting off one's nose to spite their face, or something. "Oh yeah? I'ma show them!" It's fucking stupid.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

So I've read the two links above. The evidence is not overwhelming. In fact, it's, so far, paper-thin and mostly opinions.

One sociologist claims:

"Those who have left to go and fight in Syria say that this law is one of things that encouraged them. They saw it as a law against Islam.”​

But has no evidence for this claim, or if she does have evidence, it was not presented in the article. Later the article mentions a number of French women (including teenagers) who are "fighting in the Middle East". But no details. Fighting who? Why? Did they go fight because of the ban? Other reasons? How long have they been there? Are they fighting for ISIS and other radicals, or against them? A really vague statement that, when read too quickly, seems scary, but doesn't hold up to scrutiny. The article has a lot of those. Here's another sociologist's opinion/vague claim, presented as fact:

“People had the impression that the women wearing the veil were abused by men. But in ten years I have never met a woman who was forced to wear the veil by a man,” she says.​

Because a woman being forced by her husband would openly admit to it? Because Stockholm Syndrome and early indoctrination isn't a thing? Very unconvincing.

Then there's the Wikipedia link. Which doesn't show much. In fact it actually does point out some positive effects (source here, in French):

The representatives reported instances of some women deciding to file complaints against their husbands once informed of their rights; of some others stating that they were waiting for the law to come into force so that it would compel their husbands to release them from wearing the veil; and of some others stopping the wearing of the facial veil outright after the information meetings.​

Sounds good to me? But that was early into the ban, who knows if it kept going so well.

Then it mentions a few protests (k, whatever), a few arrests without much fuss (sounds fine to me), and one testimony of a woman who complains about her quality of life dropping since the ban, but only because she openly defies the ban. Same woman repeatedly refused court orders and got into some trouble about it. So, it seems most of the negative impact has been from... people openly flouting and defying the law. ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

 

[Audioboxer]

For this new generation of "feminism" yeah no doubt. Wearing one of the most obvious form of female oppression has somehow become fighting the patriarchy or something.

Well the women wearing and truly believing they are free and treated equally aren't "feminists", they are oppressed and/or indoctrinated victims. I don't think it's productive to blame them as victims or as above call them idiots, but you can point out when statements they make look like Stockholm syndrome or the rantings of the indoctrinated.

However who does need called out strongly are those who sit in places of privilege, in a decent home, with a decent job and on a computer typing up arguments about how the burqa is a form of empowerment while not wearing one themselves. I doubt even one person in this topic has to wear one 24/7. Heck the majority posting in here are probably males. Males don't have to wear a burqa full stop, even if devout followers of Islam. Although I do ask of anyone in here saying it's empowering to for their own research live with wearing it constantly in public for a week and see how your quality of life goes. Even if you are male. However of course you'll probably handwave your need to wear it if male.

Also when I say such people need to be called out strongly, of course I mean through debate. You are entitled to hold your views as anyone is, but there is just a ton of evidence going against your views you should at least expect a lot of people to challenge you. Especially if you are a male and you are saying how these women are expressing freedom and you yourself don't want to try and engage in any debate. I've already said Merkel is trying to go with the nuclear option now, but this battle is incredibly difficult and moving at such a slow pace, education or no education. I also agree such a choice will end up with casualties, but sadly many tough decisions do.

 

[Pusherman]

However who does need called out strongly are those who sit in places of privilege, in a decent home, with a decent job and on a computer typing up arguments about how the burqa is a form of empowerment while not wearing one themselves. I doubt even one person in this topic has to wear one 24/7. Heck the majority posting in here are probably males. Males don't have to wear a burqa full stop, even if devout followers of Islam. Although I do ask of anyone in here saying it's empowering to for their own research live with wearing it constantly in public for a week and see how your quality of life goes. Even if you are male. However of course you'll probably handwave your need to wear it if male.

Also when I say such people need to be called out strongly, of course I mean through debate. You are entitled to hold your views as anyone is, but there is just a ton of evidence going against your views you should at least expect a lot of people to challenge you. Especially if you are a male and you are saying how these women are expressing freedom and you yourself don't want to try and engage in any debate. I've already said Merkel is trying to go with the nuclear option now, but this battle is incredibly difficult and moving at such a slow pace, education or no education. I also agree such a choice will end up with casualties, but sadly many tough decisions do.

By all means don't listen to me because I'm a man who doesn't wear a face-veil. But at least listen to the women who do wear one and who are speaking out against a ban. Why are you entitled to decide for them without ever listening to them. And I know you don't listen to them, none of you here have done so despite me and a few others actually posting videos and articles by women wearing a face-veil. Instead, those women either get insulted as idiots or tossed aside because they must have stockholm syndrome. How convenient that the women involved, the women actually targeted by this ban, are not allowed to have any say in it. Why is a women, who may very well have converted to Islam at an adult age without a family or husband forcing her, not allowed to disagree with you one something that will directly influence her while having nothing to do with you?

Then it mentions a few protests (k, whatever), a few arrests without much fuss (sounds fine to me), and one testimony of a woman who complains about her quality of life dropping since the ban, but only because she openly defies the ban. Same woman repeatedly refused court orders and got into some trouble about it. So, it seems most of the negative impact has been from... people openly flouting and defying the law. ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

I mean, if you actually listened to those women you'd find out why they were protesting and openly defying the ban... because believe they are defending their right to wear something they deem very important. But who cares about those 'idiots', right. ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

Earlier in this thread I asked a simple question:

Honest question, can a women, any woman, legitimately choose to become a conservative salafist muslim? Do any of you supporting this ban believe that a woman can, by choice, be a conservative muslim? I'm not asking if you agree with her choice. I'm not asking if you think her choice is a feminist one, a helpful one or a rational one. I am just asking if it is a legitimate decision to make. I mean, we already know the answer. Women not born into muslims families have, as adults, decided to become salafist muslims and wear a face-veil. Are those women mentally ill? I'm not asking if you think they're misogynistic or sexist. They might very well be. After all, they've decided to believe in a patriarchal religion. But as far as I know believing in a patriarchal religion isn't forbidden. Being a misogynist isn't forbidden (hell it might make you president of the US). There are plenty of orthodox jewish women and extremely conservative christian women living in the west. Are all of those women making decisions and living lives they shouldn't? Should they be barred from making those decisions/living those lives? Or should only conservative muslim women be told their decisions are illegitimate. That their decisions aren't 'western' enough.

No one has actually tried to answer it. Just like no one has tried listening to the women already cited in this thread. Women like:

http://idealmuslimah.com/calling-to...n-letter-to-mona-eltahawy-regarding-the-niqab

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KpvAtqwYbA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J08A3arwzxs&t=7s

And just a point on feminism, feminist criticism of Islam is one of the most interesting fields within feminist studies right now. The reason for that is because feminist criticism of Islam falls right on that intersection of race, imperialism, postcolonialism en multiculturalism. Some of the women working in the field are muslim and some aren't but all are incredibly aware of the complexities of their work. There is a lot of disagreement but none try to erase the complexities and none just erase the muslim women involved, as so many of you seem quite capable of doing. That isn't empowering in the slightest.

So to summarize, I am not convinced anyone here or out in the real world supports a ban like this because they feel genuine concerned about the muslim women involved. I am not saying everyone is an ill-intenioned Islamophobe but the fact that you aren't interested in talking and listening to the women actually wearing a face-veil should tell you something. I saw someone say that Merkel does engage with the women involved but that is just not true. This ban is quite obviously a ploy to keep the far-right from siphoning off to many votes in this year's election. Like I already said, this ban is a cheap political trick and I don't see how anyone can support it while ignoring the women involved that speak out and then turn around and tell me it was about those women the entire time. It isn't about those women. Y'all don't care about those women. This is about fighting a culture war and if we as the left start playing that game the far-right has already won.

 

[Ryuuroden]

Personally I would say let them wear what they want. If you truly believe that woman who wear these cloths are brainwashed or something then letting them wear them in public allows you to know who they are and instead of stigmitizing them, why don't you reach out to them, have normal conversations with them, befriend them. If you feel so much that these woman are being controlled by men, the last thing you want to do is make them more invisible by removing a virtual clothing billboard stating their religious identity. Maybe if you actually talk to them you will learn things and maybe they will too. When you stigmitize clothing you are doing the exact opposite of Integrating them into western society.

This is where the catch 22 is. Western culture as a whole has become so distrustful of Islam that instead of doing what I mentioned with people who wear the nikab/burka these people are pushed away, feared or discriminated against. They are rejected and thus do not integrate. What approach should be taken, I do not know. Europe is unlucky in that its Muslim communities are typically from one area per that contries colonial past. They aren't Muslims from all over the world like in America. More detail on why this matters here https://www.google.com/amp/www.ibtimes.com/why-do-american-muslims-fare-better-their-french-counterparts-2189449%3Famp%3D1?client=ms-android-verizon

The closest parallel is Europe treats its Muslim communities the same way America treats its black community. I don't think I really need to explain why that's a big fucking problem. What's worse is most European countries treat their Muslim communities the way America did the black community BEFORE the civil rights movement and its forced changes. Europe is taking the approach that Europeans attitudes are not the issue and that its all on the Muslims. Good luck with that Europe, it's your dirty little secret that is just as bad as what you criticise Israel for, what you sanctioned South Africa for and what you criticise America for even though America has now taken far more steps facing its racial issues.

The Muslim issue in Europe is a racial one precisely because each European countries Muslim community is very much connected to that countries colonial history.

 

[Clefargle]

Her stance seems very specific. If you're in a public space you shouldn't be able to hide your identity.

Right, as long as this only applies to public spaces then I see how you could make the case that it is about identifying yourself and protecting the freedoms of others.

 

[azyless]

Earlier in this thread I asked a simple question:

Honest question, can a women, any woman, legitimately choose to become a conservative salafist muslim?

This sorta suggests that religion itself and the culture around it aren't a form of pressure but for the sake of it let's answer : Yes I do. So what ? I've mentionned multiple times in this thread that the concerns over a woman's personal choice weren't the be all and end all of a burqa/niqab ban.
You can scream until you're blue in the face that they're regular clothes all you want but they are symbols of religious extremism and no moderate muslim would ever wear those in western societies.

 

[Audioboxer]

By all means don't listen to me because I'm a man who doesn't wear a face-veil. But at least listen to the women who do wear one and who are speaking out against a ban. Why are you entitled to decide for them without ever listening to them. And I know you don't listen to them, none of you here have done so despite me and a few others actually posting videos and articles by women wearing a face-veil. Instead, those women either get insulted as idiots or tossed aside because they must have stockholm syndrome. How convenient that the women involved, the women actually targeted by this ban, are not allowed to have any say in it. Why is a women, who may very well have converted to Islam at an adult age without a family or husband forcing her, not allowed to disagree with you one something that will directly influence her while having nothing to do with you?



I mean, if you actually listened to those women you'd find out why they were protesting and openly defying the ban... because believe they are defending their right to wear something they deem very important. But who cares about those 'idiots', right. ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

Earlier in this thread I asked a simple question:



No one has actually tried to answer it. Just like no one has tried listening to the women already cited in this thread. Women like:

http://idealmuslimah.com/calling-to...n-letter-to-mona-eltahawy-regarding-the-niqab

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KpvAtqwYbA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J08A3arwzxs&t=7s

And just a point on feminism, feminist criticism of Islam is one of the most interesting fields within feminist studies right now. The reason for that is because feminist criticism of Islam falls right on that intersection of race, imperialism, postcolonialism en multiculturalism. Some of the women working in the field are muslim and some aren't but all are incredibly aware of the complexities of their work. There is a lot of disagreement but none try to erase the complexities and none just erase the muslim women involved, as so many of you seem quite capable of doing. That isn't empowering in the slightest.

So to summarize, I am not convinced anyone here or out in the real world supports a ban like this because they feel genuine concerned about the muslim women involved. I am not saying everyone is an ill-intenioned Islamophobe but the fact that you aren't interested in talking and listening to the women actually wearing a face-veil should tell you something. I saw someone say that Merkel does engage with the women involved but that is just not true. This ban is quite obviously a ploy to keep the far-right from siphoning off to many votes in this year's election. Like I already said, this ban is a cheap political trick and I don't see how anyone can support it while ignoring the women involved that speak out and then turn around and tell me it was about those women the entire time. It isn't about those women. Y'all don't care about those women. This is about fighting a culture war and if we as the left start playing that game the far-right has already won.

How are they not allowed to have any say? They came into the countries and have been wearing full face coverings for quite a while. Just like Netherlands and other places in Europe practice Zwarte Piet with blackface times can change and we can self-reflect on things we allow to go on once we get feedback/experience on them. At the very least constantly covering your face apart from a slit is anti-social, at worst it can be considered a security risk in SOME high security areas. On top of that as a symbolic item it is drenched in oppression, so it is up to our societies to debate whether we think it's healthy or not for such a thing. If it is such a deal breaker for you, and you cannot empathise with any other argument than they should be allowed at all times, then yes, politely said, you can of course leave the country you live in and go elsewhere where they value the burqa in a different way than we might. Different places all over the world value different things. What is up next? Telling some Western countries they are wrong to vehemently reject any sort of Sharia Law (like Germany has) because women are coming forward and saying they like it? Telling us women enjoy FGM so we should consider it? Telling us child brides are a thing in certain places and why can't we think of the men who are not wanting to marry 10 year olds? Extreme examples, yeah, but again parts of religion and culture we reject and create laws around.

People can disagree but cultures overall can change. Not everyone is always going to be happy, but as said many times in here I think most of us do a damn fine job in the West. Germany included for allowing in as many refugees as they have. Some would argue having done it a bit carelessly with too open a border. Still, they are an empathetic nation, they just aren't going to be ruled and dictated by any one religion. If that is what anyone is after there is plenty of countries you can go to where Islam does hold ownership of the whole country. Ironically though many Muslims flee from said countries... I wonder why? Maybe it's because while a lot of Europe and America isn't perfect, we do a damn decent job and are constantly trying to fight to do better.

Also I bring up the comparison to men in this topic, because why the fuck do men not need to wear a full face covering? Where is the logic there? If your rebuttal is well as a male I don't need to wear it, here, look again at these women who want to. Then that in on itself is part of the problem. WHY do you not need to wear it as a man? Why do you not need to be subjected to probably struggling to see properly? Why do you not need to be taken away from some of the joys of human life that include facial expressions, laughter, smiling, and so on? Because you are a man? Yeah... that's the problem.

 

[azyless]

The closest parallel is Europe treats its Muslim communities the same way America treats its black community. I don't think I really need to explain why that's a big fucking problem. What's worse is most European countries treat their Muslim communities the way America did the black community BEFORE the civil rights movement and its forced changes. Europe is taking the approach that Europeans attitudes are not the issue and that its all on the Muslims.

I mean we sure did a lot of things wrong but let's compare what's comparable, how long had those black americans been in the USA before the civil rights movement started ? Muslim immigration in Europe is mostly very recent (post 1945) and is still ongoing (and from a very different socioeconomic status than those immigrating to the US). There are similarities with the US but they're very different situations.

 

[Pusherman]

This sorta suggests that religion itself and the culture around it aren't a form of pressure but for the sake of it let's answer : Yes I do. So what ? I've mentionned multiple times in this thread that the concerns over a woman's personal choice weren't the be all and end all of a burqa/niqab ban.
You can scream until you're blue in the face that they're regular clothes all you want but they are symbols of religious extremism and no moderate muslim would ever wear those in western societies.

Look now we're getting somewhere. My biggest point of contention was with the people suggesting that this ban was for the women wearing a face-veil. If we can agree that concern for those women is not in fact the reason behind these bans then we are at least discussing on common ground. And then it becomes pretty simple, you see I don't think, as a progressive who supports multiculturalism, that my opinion matters all that much when it comes to curtailing the freedom of others. That usually requires better reasoning.

The 2010 ban in France was upheld by the European Court of Human Rights because the ban was meant to preserve to conditions for 'living together' in France. The French government articulated 2 other arguments, one on the basis of public safety and one on the basis of gender equality but those two the ECHR rejected. I disagree with the ECHR that conditions for living together are a justified ground for a general ban. I'm an individualist, I can certainly see why a face-veil might not be practical and perhaps even dangerous in a handful of situations but I do not believe that those situations are then grounds to ban the thing everywhere/most places. People have the individual freedom to express themselves and that freedom supersedes something as vague as the conditions for 'living together'. That's probably why a general face-veil ban, or even most face-veil bans, would simple be impossible in the United States because the US is far more protective of people's individual rights.

There is an academic article in the Human Rights Review titled "Burqa Ban, Freedom of Religion and ‘Living Together'" that goes into the reasoning given by the Court and that criticizes that reasoning as being insufficient. If you've got access to a University database you should read it, as it is quite interesting.

Also, just a quick note, of course religion and culture are pressuring but that goes for all religions and all cultures, including western culture. No decision remains legitimate if we look at all the ways people are influenced in their decision-making. As I said, there are interviews with women who were born in atheist or christian families that later converted to Islam and started to wear a face-veil. So women can and have decided to wear a face-veil without direct or indirect force from their parents or husband. That's just reality.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Look now we're getting somewhere. My biggest point of contention was with the people suggesting that this ban was for the women wearing a face-veil. If we can agree that concern for those women is not in fact the reason behind these bans then we are at least discussing on common ground. And then it becomes pretty simple, you see I don't think, as a progressive who supports multiculturalism, that my opinion matters all that much when it comes to curtailing the freedom of others. That usually requires better reasoning.

It has been spelled out before that it is about multiple factors. If you chose to ignore that, that is on you. For example, the safety argument has come up multiple times. We constantly ban things, despite some people wanting to make the choice to do that thing.

It is for both the women and people around them, since we need to live together in a society and a burqa gets between that.

 

[Ryuuroden]

I mean we sure did a lot of things wrong but let's compare what's comparable, how long had those black americans been in the USA before the civil rights movement started ? Muslim immigration in Europe is mostly very recent (post 1945) and is still ongoing (and from a very different socioeconomic status than those immigrating to the US). There are similarities with the US but they're very different situations.

Yeah and as shown by the still ongoing resistance to change in the USA and continuing racism, the sooner you legislate changes in workplace and hiring and education discriminating in Europe the better you will be in the long run. The longer you exacerbate it, the more it gets normalized generationally. That's why America is still in a bad place in racial relations. Racism was systematically normalized over so many generations that people discriminate without even realizing it. It is ridiculously harder to eliminate the longer you let it persist.

 

[azyless]

The 2010 ban in France was upheld by the European Court of Human Rights because the ban was meant to preserve to conditions for 'living together' in France. The French government articulated 2 other arguments, one on the basis of public safety and one on the basis of gender equality but those two the ECHR rejected. I disagree with the ECHR that conditions for living together are a justified ground for a general ban. I'm an individualist, I can certainly see why a face-veil might not be practical and perhaps even dangerous in a handful of situations but I do not believe that those situations are then grounds to ban the thing everywhere/most places. People have the individual freedom to express themselves and that freedom supersedes something as vague as the conditions for 'living together'. That's probably why a general face-veil ban, or even most face-veil bans, would simple be impossible in the United States because the US is far more protective of people's individual rights.

I don't think the freedom to express themselves supersedes everything, no. Definitely not when it comes to symbols of extremism. Someone could be wearing a swastika and tell me, or even deeply believe so themselves, that the swastika is a symbol of peace, and I would also tell them it has no place here. (And surprise it's illegal as well.)

And considering the USA's stand on religion you're really not gonna convince me by bringing them up.

Also, just a quick note, of course religion and culture are pressuring but that goes for all religions and all cultures, including western culture. No decision remains legitimate if we look at all the ways people are influenced in their decision-making. As I said, there are interviews with women who were born in atheist or christian families that later converted to Islam and started to wear a face-veil. So women can and have decided to wear a face-veil without direct or indirect force from their parents or husband. That's just reality.

I can somewhat understand "converting" or starting to follow a religion without direct influence from someone else (not sure why you're limiting this to parents and husband though). However, no I cannot understand that woman wearing a face veil, without being coerced into it by someone else, be it a family member or a radical imam or whoever else.

Yeah and as shown by the still ongoing resistance to change in the USA and continuing racism, the sooner you legislate changes in workplace and hiring and education discriminating in Europe the better you will be in the long run. The longer you exacerbate it, the more it gets normalized generationally. That's why America is still in a bad place in racial relations. Racism was systematically normalized over so many generations that people discriminate without even realizing it. It is ridiculously harder to eliminate the longer you let it persist.

I don't disagree with that. I just don't see a niqab/burqa ban as discrimination, since this is the subject. And the more we tolerate radical Islam the more normalized it gets, why is that more acceptable ?

 

[ClosingADoor]

The Muslim issue in Europe is a racial one precisely because each European countries Muslim community is very much connected to that countries colonial history.

Germany didn't have Turkey as a colony. Netherlands didn't have Morocco as a colony. While there are of course links (France comes to mind, and the Netherlands with its black and Indonesian population), very few countries outside of France and the UK had colonies in the Muslim world that lead to a large move of people from there.

Yeah and as shown by the still ongoing resistance to change in the USA and continuing racism, the sooner you legislate changes in workplace and hiring and education discriminating in Europe the better you will be in the long run. The longer you exacerbate it, the more it gets normalized generationally. That's why America is still in a bad place in racial relations. Racism was systematically normalized over so many generations that people discriminate without even realizing it. It is ridiculously harder to eliminate the longer you let it persist.

If we follow that line of thought, we should crack down even more on religious extremist things, since we don't want it to be normalized.

 

[Pusherman]

I can somewhat understand "converting" or starting to follow a religion without direct influence from someone else (not sure why you're limiting this to parents and husband though). However, no I cannot understand that woman wearing a face veil, without being coerced into it by someone else, be it a family member or a radical imam or whoever else.

And I am telling you that the reason you can't understand a woman making that decision is because you aren't actually interested in understanding it. You have shown no interest in hearing what those women have to say for themselves. There are women explaining why they made the decision to wear a face-veil. Those women just exist. You can quibble about whether these women represent all or even most of the women wearing a face-veil in the west but you can't just ignore them. A ban on the face-veil harms nobody expect those women so why not hear them out. Here's a link to a dutch TV-show about women travelling with their daughters that converted to Islam:

http://www.npo.nl/npo3/van-hagelslag-naar-halal-op-npo-3

As you can see, one of the daughters wears a niqab. Her mother was a catholic and often doesn't understand. Why should the decision of this young adult not be respected? Why are you entitled to just assume things about her and decide for her what is and isn't a legitimate decision to make?

 

[Pie and Beans]

The Casey Review here recently in the UK about integration of immigrants and particularly muslim communities, while heavy handed, does cut to the core of the problem: integration into a whole society.

Full veil clothing is always going to be at odds with integration into western communities at large or any community that isn't Islam. It completely shuts down any chance of Muslims and non-muslims beginning that much needed "friendly chat at the bus stop" process of 50-100 years for things to normalise. It is isolating and reflective of some of Islam's most obvious failings.

'Banning' such things then paints authorities as villains, but it really has become a push comes to shove issue. How do you speed up integration and the ol' 'coming together' process when there are un-shifting obstacles melting into "maybe things will becomes moderate 2 more generations down the line".

 

[Ryuuroden]

Germany didn't have Turkey as a colony. Netherlands didn't have Morocco as a colony. While there are of course links (France comes to mind, and the Netherlands with its black and Indonesian population), very few countries outside of France and the UK had colonies in the Muslim world that lead to a large move of people from there.


If we follow that line of thought, we should crack down even more on religious extremist things, since we don't want it to be normalized.

Well, ill connect the two. If you just ban garments and do not address any of the issues that lead to the easy radicalisation of Muslims in Europe you are actually being counterperductive and in the eyes of Muslims just discriminating against them further. Muslims are treated like 2nd class citizens, are discriminated in the work place and refused education opportunities and more. You're ban on what some of them choose to wear is seen by all of them as you just making yourselves feel better by trying to put the onnus entirely on their community. If you did this in conjunction with laws against descrimination, and for equal opportunity you will go much further in making radicalization a lesser threat. The clothing ban is just a visual bandage that antagonizes more than anything when done alone.

 

[azyless]

..

Look I'm tired of interacting with you so I'll be short and add you to my IL. I know exactly why these women make that decision and I do not respect it. I'm done now, you can go be an extremism apologist all you want.