GameBanshee Forums

Malta Soron wrote:On burka's: is there reason to assume that the women who wear burka's in Holland feel being oppressed? Except for the hystirical who called herself Hirsi Ali I never hear of muslim women complaining that they have to wear a headscarf or burka.

I think this gets at the core of something important to the topic..
Is it right to judge another culture by our own standards?
I wrestle with this sometimes, especially where issues involving the rights of women are concerned.

However, I also feel we need to think carefully about whether or not women wearing a burka would, in fact, object to the practice. Undoubtedly, some who are strong and outspoken would do so. But how many?
In a similar vein, one could ask how many women who are ostensibly Christian fundamentalists would champion abortion rights. What would happen to such women within their respective communities?


As I suggested in my earlier post, and as others here have stated, this entire proposed legislation screams political opportunism and latent Nazism. So, while I'm personally uncomfortable with all a burka signifies, I'm not attempting to defend the proposal, basically I'm playing "devil's advocate" for a moment.

Europe's Burqa Wars [Weblog] - Daniel Pipes

The culture is a very sensitive issue.
The cultural traditions are to be respected but there is something to be left behind when a Muslim family decide to settle in a Western-culture country.
Polygamy (4 wives) and female circumcision are the prime examples.
To become a citizen of a country means to abide the laws of this country. If the law requires a photo ID, a citizen must have a photo ID. However, many women wearing burqa ‘refuse’. I can see a problem here, not in the 'culture'.
I leave the Muslim 'culture' to Muslims.

Saira Khan wrote in the Times:
“It is never right for a woman to hide behind a veil and shut herself off from people in the community. But it is particularly wrong in Britain, where it alien to the mainstream culture for someone to walk around wearing a mask. The veil restricts women, it stops them achieving their full potential in all areas of their life and it stops them communicating. It sends out a clear message: ‘I do not want to be part of your society.’”

Millions of Muslims reside in Europe nowadays and more is yet to come.
I can see that some Europeans might feel uncomfortable with the massive immigration, given the 'Islamic terrorists scare' and other concerns. I could understand these concerns if not share them completely but I would not go so far as call it all Neo-Nazism. Apparently the resentment runs deep enough for some politicians to capitalize on it and earn votes in the upcoming elections, that much is obvious. The situation is painfully familiar. We had a wild Mexican card played and replayed during the last elections.

What strikes me most in this bizarre burqa incident is that it’s happening in the Netherlands, the country overly tolerant towards drugs and prostitution and I heard euthanasia as well.
That boggles my mind.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 93,00.html

Lady Dragonfly wrote:What strikes me most in this bizarre burqa incident is that it’s happening in the Netherlands, the country overly tolerant towards drugs and prostitution and I heard euthanasia as well.

Ouch, there goes my nation's pride. Hey, at least we don't have to put up with the Patriot Act.

I think a problem is our hypocracy.

Gay marriage: A big source of pride because we were one of the first to legalize it. It doesn't however signify it's a better living as a gay man in Holland. For example, an American tourist was almost beaten to death in Amsterdam for walking hand in hand with his boyfriend two years ago during the famous Amsterdam Canalpride.

Drug policies: We usually just claim ours are better and we are quick to berate other countries on it. These laws come down to being able to 'keep an eye on the traffic' and although there is the part where the government provides for addicts so they won't steal, the taxpayer ends up paying the price for that anyway. Etc, etc.. the whole policy is a Faustian deal if you ask me.

Euthanasia: It's not exactly Logan's Run. It is possible, but what you won't hear on NBC is that many doctors (I won't say most) refuse to provide it. It can't be pulled off without risking serious legal consequences, so it tends to scare away capable hands. So, despite whether or not some terminally ill deserve it, for some it remains out of reach indefinetely. So much for their 'right' to get it.

We're a midget-country. We try to talk big to keep up with the G8, but at the same time we lack political, economical and military substance to back it up.

Tricky wrote:Ouch, there goes my nation's pride. Hey, at least we don't have to put up with the Patriot Act.

You furnished the 17th and 18th century models for it. I'm just kidding, but the similarities between the US and Dutch cultural mechanisms is pretty staggering. Both believed in their formative years that they were "destined by God" to lead the rest of the world. Both quickly became economic powerhouses. Both were inundated with fulminations from the pulpit about their luxurious lifestyles, and the probable destruction of their national destiny as a result. Both were torn by two parties, one that favored expansionism and engagement, while the other perferred isolation and no immigration. Both put enormous emphasis on the family as the core social unit--the Dutch were in fact the first European nation to do so. Both regularly viewed national catastrophies as a warning from On High that they were straying from the Path. (And no, that's not typical in most other nations.) In times of national ferment, both nations enacted draconian laws that allowed for instant search and seizure, along with a complete waiver of all citizens' rights they normally were very proud of, and enjoyed boasting about in the faces of their neighbors.

I think the Netherlands is simply showing the other side of its bipolar personality for the first time in a while. Under pressure from immigrants, it's closing in on itself. Populist politicians are getting elected, and Calivnist morality is being trumpeted. The Netherlands is questioning what it means to be Dutch. Lets just hope there's no 21st century equivalent to the horribly sancitimonious rhyming drivel Jacob Cats published as bestsellers back in the 17th century.

That is very interesting, it never occured to me before how many similarities there are. What I remember from the 18th/19th century history course I took does indeed have indeed a striking resemblance with it. I'll have to look that up some more, if only to satisfy my personal interests.

To get back on the subject, he's a picture of what a burka/burga/burqa looks like: http://www.afghan-web.com/shop/nproduct ... /burqa.jpg

*refrains himself from making pac-man noises

Whackawacka.. -dammit!

Hey Magrus, Pretty damn busy that I am now headed to Lebanon with the peackeeping mission there. I am now part of UNFIL.

.....and female circumcision are the prime examples.

To clear up some factual inaccuracies. FGM is not a Muslim concept. Rather it is an African concept that is dominated by local culture and tradition. A simple example is that FGM in Egypt is practice by the Coptic Christian minority and not the muslim majority. It is actively practice in sub-Saharan Africa which is not a Muslim region per se.

As for culture. One must realise a simple fact. Those who move to europe don't do it for the freedom and love of European society or American society. They do it for cash. Nothing else. Economic oppurtunities are far greater in these areas than anywhere else in the world.

I have a simple question for those who say one must follow the laws of the land. Would you abide by the laws of Saudi Arabia - where a woman can not leave the house alone, or she can not drive a car or that she has to walk 3 paces behind the man, and not complain about human right abuses?

Lastly forcing your opinion and way of life is wrong, regardless of what stupid excuses one can come up with. Forcing someone to wear a burqa by law is just as stupid as forcing them to take it off. You ignore their basic fundamental human rights and you invalidate their right to decide for themselves. Basically the question the dutch government should be asked is who gave you the damn right to tell others what to do?

Today Muslims can't wear the burqa, next they will be forced to wear a yellow star as a way to keep tabs on them.

CM wrote:As for culture. One must realise a simple fact. Those who move to europe don't do it for the freedom and love of European society or American society. They do it for cash. Nothing else. Economic oppurtunities are far greater in these areas than anywhere else in the world.

Or so people believe. What those people don't know - even if it's told to them by friends or family members who already moved to Europe - that many immigrants have it very, very hard. There are many myths in West Africa, for instance, about the riches in Europe.

CM wrote:I have a simple question for those who say one must follow the laws of the land. Would you abide by the laws of Saudi Arabia - where a woman can not leave the house alone, or she can not drive a car or that she has to walk 3 paces behind the man, and not complain about human right abuses?

No, but then again, the circumstances you mention are enough to convince me not to move there. I'm not saying that all immigrants should follow all the laws of the land, but some adaption seems necessary when you move to another country. In Europe, people generally feel that it's wrong let women walk 3 paces behind the men. So, if you're not prepared to drop that habit, you might want to consider not moving to Europe.

CM wrote:Lastly forcing your opinion and way of life is wrong, regardless of what stupid excuses one can come up with. Forcing someone to wear a burqa by law is just as stupid as forcing them to take it off. You ignore their basic fundamental human rights and you invalidate their right to decide for themselves. Basically the question the dutch government should be asked is who gave you the damn right to tell others what to do?

Very good point. However, people who argue to ban the burqa are usually doing so to defend the rights of oppressed women. :speech: Omigod! I'm defending something Rita Verdonk said!

CM wrote:Today Muslims can't wear the burqa, next they will be forced to wear a yellow star as a way to keep tabs on them.

Ouch! That wouldn't hurt so much if there was no truth in there.

Hey CM, be careful over there in Lebanon.

Coot wrote:Very good point. However, people who argue to ban the burqa are usually doing so to defend the rights of oppressed women. :speech: Omigod! I'm defending something Rita Verdonk said!

I return to my earlier question, because I'm still wondering about it: do Dutch muslima's wearing burqa's actually feel oppressed, or is is the projection of our ideas of happiness and human rights (as they have come forth from the Enlightment) upon them?

moral equivalence moral equivalence moral equi

CM wrote:I have a simple question for those who say one must follow the laws of the land. Would you abide by the laws of Saudi Arabia - where a woman can not leave the house alone, or she can not drive a car or that she has to walk 3 paces behind the man, and not complain about human right abuses?

I'm far from a believer in moral absolutism, but I think I can safely say that the practices you are describing are morally repugnant on an absolute level regardless of cultural context, and as such I would personally feel no obligation to follow them in Saudi Arabia or anywhere else on God's green earth.

I really don't want to appear to be a follower of the everything-is-black-or-white dogma, but implying that female oppression in Saudi Arabia is morally equivalent to somewhat more moderate Dutch laws (because, after all, if something can be ascribed to being a part of a different culture it is above reproach) is silly.

Oh, and for what it's worth banning burkas is stupid too. Just not as stupid as forbidding another human being from leaving the house because they happened to be born with a vagina instead of a penis.

CM wrote:To clear up some factual inaccuracies. FGM is not a Muslim concept. Rather it is an African concept that is dominated by local culture and tradition. A simple example is that FGM in Egypt is practice by the Coptic Christian minority and not the muslim majority. It is actively practice in sub-Saharan Africa which is not a Muslim region per se.

While not denying that FS is widespread in Africa, I would like to point out that this barbaric procedure is practiced among Muslims as well.

'The Ulema Council, Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI), says female circumcision is necessary for Muslims.'

Female Circumcision - Indonesia Matters

'Migrants from Muslim countries where female circumcision is a traditional practice, pose unexpected problems for European doctors and the justice system of their adopted countries. Muslim women, Dutch and French doctors, and French legal officers comment on the relationship between tradition and modern attitudes towards the practice.'

FGC Education and Networking Project

If Rita Verdonk and her clones weren't playing to a bigot base, this wouldn't even be an issue. I find it hard to understand how mandating "freedom" can be perceived as freedom in any sense of the word.

fable wrote: I find it hard to understand how mandating "freedom" can be perceived as freedom in any sense of the word.

And the funny thing is, Verdonk is a high-ranking member of the VVD; the Dutch liberal party, a party that values freedom so much. Go figger.

dragon wench wrote:I think this gets at the core of something important to the topic..
Is it right to judge another culture by our own standards?
etc.

It doesn't have to do with different cultures.

Take a loot at it in a neutral way; does the woman have equal rights as the man does?
With extreme religions, be it old fashioned Christians or radical muslims, the answer is no.
In the old Christian days, men for example could hit woman... in some places this is still the case. In some muslim countries, a man has more rights then a woman, for example a women can't go out alone or vote.

The burqa is mearly is simbul.
But the difference is culture only matters in the fact that women have more rights in most western countries nowadays; and we can now see that a woman deserves the same rights a man has.
In some countries this is not yet the case, and in these countries a burqa is normal. When the there is no difference in man and woman, there will be no burqa.

Coot wrote:And the funny thing is, Verdonk is a high-ranking member of the VVD; the Dutch liberal party, a party that values freedom so much. Go figger.

Well, and it's the Socialists in France who pushed the bill through through their parliment declaring it a crime to refer to the Armenian Massacre as anything other than a genocide. This is the kind of behavior one would expect from Le Pen and his far-right nutjobs, not the left, but the craving to rule makes for strange bedfellows.

The Ugly Trio: Faith, Hope and Love

What in your opinion is more disheartening:

1. 'LOVE' A wh…sorry, a lady in a window with a price tag attached
2. 'FAITH' A Muslim woman wearing a supposedly oppressive burqa
3. 'HOPE' A female minister of immigration trying to ban burqa for ‘security’ reason.

What say you?

Rob-hin wrote:It doesn't have to do with different cultures.

Take a loot at it in a neutral way; does the woman have equal rights as the man does?

Our idea that all persons are equal and henceforth deserve equal rights comes forth from the Enlightment. Back then (in the 18th century) the philosophers said that deep down all people are (literally) the same, and that differences are caused by education, culture etc. Because they are the same, they should be given equal rights. (The French revolution was based on this.)
Since then (already in the 19th century) we've recognized that not all people are the same, but that everybody is unique and should be treated in such a way. From this follows that (though AFAIK it was never said) something like equal rights is complete nonsense.
So whether you assume that people have equal rights ís a matter of culture and perception of the human being. Personally I do believe in equal rights, however not for the abovementioned reason, but for a religious one. (See? Fundamentalists aren't that bad )

Note on the early Christian days: Paul was rather revolutionary with his ideas on how women should be treated. He valued them much higher than most of the cultures of those days.

Malta Soron wrote:Since then (already in the 19th century) we've recognized that not all people are the same, but that everybody is unique and should be treated in such a way. From this follows that (though AFAIK it was never said) something like equal rights is complete nonsense.

Wait what, how does this follow? That paragraph lost me completely.

If I'm reading this correctly, you seem to say that in the 19th century someone realized that we're not all completely alike and it therefore follows no one has any rights. There's more that's wrong than the non-sequitur here.

Vicsun wrote:Wait what, how does this follow? That paragraph lost me completely.

If I'm reading this correctly, you seem to say that in the 19th century someone realized that we're not all completely alike and it therefore follows no one has any rights. There's more that's wrong than the non-sequitur here.

Then I wasn't clear. I meant to say that the idea of equal rights was based on the idea that all people (deep down) are similar. In the 19th century people recognized this isn't the case; everybody is different. Henceforth should everybody be treated (and given rights) depending on their unique personality. This could for example mean that only people who are (most) qualified to vote can vote. However, the idea of equal rights survived and is still part of the western culture.

Verdonk's party lost big time so I'm thinking the burqa will be around in Holland for some time. All of them

Coot wrote:Verdonk's party lost big time so I'm thinking the burqa will be around in Holland for some time. All of them

That Verdonk supported the idea doesn't mean the whole VVD stood behind it.

Besides, it seems the burqa hasn't made it to the news much lately and the motion will more than likely fade to the background. Until there's another clash between the Islam and western orientated institutions in our country, of course.