|
| Author | Message / Information |
| James. Quote | Reply | | U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why posted on: 10/18/2006 9:47:34 AM U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why HAMIDA GHAFOUR From Wednesday's Globe and Mail LONDON — For the past two weeks, the image of Islam's most iconic symbol, the black veil drawn across the face, has been plastered all over British television and newspapers. The debate about the niqab, as it is called, was kick-started two weeks ago by a cabinet minister's comments. But it gained new urgency Tuesday when Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair waded in, calling the veil a “mark of separation” that makes others feel uncomfortable. “Difficult as these issues are, I think they have to be raised and confronted and dealt with,” he said during his monthly news conference. No one believes his remarks and those of others in the cabinet were accidental. Every comment, every gesture by New Labour is carefully considered. But one question was on nearly everyone's mind Tuesday: Why is the British government pushing this debate now? Some Britons, including Muslims, welcome the debate. Others are suspicious the government is creating a scapegoat to draw attention away from the messy wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Paul Kelly of the London School of Economics said tackling the failures of multiculturalism is the last platform for Labour as Chancellor Gordon Brown takes over the party, which he is expected to do next year. “Brown has talked in a general sense about what that debate would be. He has talked about creating a common, strong sense of Britishness and creating a core of values for everyone to buy into. So in a sense, it is saying, ‘Let the debate start,' “ Prof. Kelly said. “. . . But Brown hasn't given substance to his previous speeches, which is partly why we have this problem now about what exactly ‘British identity' means.” The current controversy began when House of Commons leader Jack Straw wrote in a newspaper article Oct. 5 that he was asking women in his Blackburn constituency office to remove their veils because it made communication difficult. The storm continued to rage last week when a primary-school classroom assistant, Aishah Azmi, was suspended for refusing to remove her veil while teaching. Phil Woolas, Minister for Community Cohesion, Race and Faith, said she should be fired. Tuesday, Mr. Blair said he “fully supported” the school authority's decision to suspend her. Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi also joined the fray Tuesday, saying that Muslim immigrant women should not be completely “hidden” behind full veils if they want to integrate and become part of Italy's future. He made the remark after being asked about Mr. Straw's comments. In the immediate aftermath of the July 7, 2005, terrorist attacks on London's transit system, the government's response was to push for new laws, including mandatory identification cards for every British citizen and giving police the power to detain terrorism suspects for 28 days without charge. Now, the fight against terrorism has shifted to challenging the values of multiculturalism. In August, a commission was launched to look at multicultural tensions because, as one minister said, “global tensions are being reflected on the streets of local communities.” However, most Muslims — even those who agreed with Mr. Straw — expressed suspicion at the government's motives. Azzam Tamimi, at the Institute of Islamic Political Thought, said the debate is meant to deflect the government's foreign-policy failures. “I don't even support the veil, but I think politicians are trying to make it an issue because they want to find a scapegoat for their failures,” he said. “They are losing in Iraq, in a quagmire in Afghanistan and started a war in Lebanon.” Since less than 1 per cent of the 1.5 million Muslims in Britain are fully veiled, it should hardly be major issue, some argue. But Adil Salahi, a scholar at the Al-Furqan Islamic Heritage Association, said Muslims are divided on the issue and the debate needs to be held in public because there is no basis for the veil in the Koran. Special to The Globe and Mail |
|
James.
Quote | Reply | This message was updated on 10/18/2006 9:50:11 AM by James. |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/18/2006 9:49:27 AM Hmmm...the Globe & Mail now has a section where people can post comments in reply to articles and discuss issues. After seeing comment # 9 in that section I looked up why the teacher in question referencd in the above article was suspended and found some interesting info: School suspends woman over veil A Muslim woman has been suspended by a school in West Yorkshire after she insisted on wearing a veil in lessons. Bilingual support worker Aishah Azmi, 24, was asked to remove the veil after pupils found it hard to understand her during English language lessons. Headfield Church of England Junior School, in Dewsbury, said she could wear the veil outside the classroom. Ms Azmi refused and was suspended pending the outcome of an employment tribunal, Kirklees Council said. The tribunal heard the case in September and is due to announce its decision within the next two weeks. Dewsbury MP Shahid Malik backed the school's decision, saying: "In schools the top priority has got to be the education of our children. "I fully support the decision of the education authority and the school in requesting the classroom assistant remove her veil when teaching primary school children. "I believe the education authority has bent over backwards to be accommodating and has been extremely reasonable and sensible in the decision it has come to. "There is no religious obligation whatsoever for Muslim women to cover themselves up in front of primary school children." 'Inadequate standards' The school, which has 529 pupils aged seven to 11, takes many children from different ethnic backgrounds where English is not the first language. An Ofsted report carried out in February said: "The first languages spoken by most children are Panjabi, Gujarati and Urdu, and many children are still learning to speak English. "Significant improvement is required in relation to the inadequate standards of achievement reached by children and their slow progress over time. "Children's speaking skills are poor and this holds them back in most aspects of their work." Kirklees Council's children's services spokesman, Jim Dodds, said Ms Azmi's suspension was "nothing to do with religion". Teachers' concern "We are simply trying to ensure that our children get the best possible education," he said. "Both pupils and teachers raised concerns because they were finding it difficult to make out what she was saying during lessons. "We have a lot of pupils who do not speak English as a first language and you have to be able to see people's lips move when you are being taught. "We asked this young lady to remove her veil when she was teaching English language, but she refused." Mr Dodds said that even if Ms Azmi won her case the council would not change its position. "Our only concern is that the children are taught properly," he said. Last week, Commons leader Jack Straw angered some Muslims when he said wearing the veil made community relations more difficult. |
|
Dil Bert
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/18/2006 11:26:06 AM On the BBC they said that Aishah Azmi interviewed for the job without the veil. |
|
**kat
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/18/2006 12:13:20 PM According to Aishah Azmi, she did not insist on wearing the niqab in front of the children, only if a male colleague was present. There are so many different versions of this tale going around at the moment it's difficult to know exactly what happened. Apparently she did indeed interview for the position without a veil, in front of a male school governor. I don't think she's really much of a poster-girl for the niqabi cause, poor thing has been thrust into the spotlight due to the timing of this national debate happening at the same time of her suspension, but she isn't axactly the articulate spokesperson needed at the moment! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNTNWf5Q2Zo This debate is getting increasingly out of hand - I for one find it appalling that a government minister has literally asked female constituents to "wear less" in meetings with him. As for this idea that the niqab makes people feel uncomfortable, well men in England football shirts with cans of lager make me feel uncomfortable, but I don't question their right to do so in public! This is not to say that I personally can agree, as a woman, with the logic behind wearing niqab, but a person's decisions about their own morality and modesty are not something that can or should be influenced by political and press attacks! The niqab is just one easy and visual thing to pick on, there are much more important factors which drive communities apart, political decisions taken with regards to Iraq and Afghanistan, segregated housing and schooling, economic deprivation, unrelentingly negative press coverage... but no these are fish that are too big to fry, lets pick on a handful of women. |
|
James.
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/18/2006 9:02:51 PM quote: No kidding about being inarticulate, *kat- and it seems to me that since her articulation when she speaks English is so poor, it's understandable that children who are learning English would have a hard time if anything further impedes comprehension (like the veil). Anyway, while I also completely and categorically disagree with the logic of wearing the veil, I do agree that women have that right... quote: But he isn't asking them to wear something that would allow a letch to leer at women. He's asking for something that is well within the realm of (sexual) morality. I can certainly appreciate why having a minister of the crown dictating how people dress would be irritating, though. |
|
Dil Bert
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/18/2006 11:23:12 PM quote:Technically correct.  He's asking them to not wear something, which would then allow a letch to leer at women.quote:Is it? I thought women were to wear the veil when in the presence of non-family men. It could be like that cloth (dupata?) that Indian women are supposed to wear over their top -- it seems silly to Westerners, but seems important in India. |
|
melbguy
Quote | Reply | This message was updated on 10/19/2006 4:25:53 AM by melbguy |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/19/2006 12:33:42 AM I think if muslim women are forced they would wear hijab and other stuff just to prove they cant be ordered what to wear. It is better not to tell anyone what they can or cant wear. It is personal choice. In india no one forces muslims what they can or cant wear. Overall muslims in india are more liberal then any other country i have been to. |
|
James.
Quote | Reply | This message was updated on 10/19/2006 10:05:55 AM by James. |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/19/2006 9:53:08 AM quote: quote: Some of the cholis/blouses expose a lot of cleavage, so I understand even in a Western context why some women would wear their dupatta over that. Not doing it would certainly bring some unwanted attention. If a man is is the type to leer at a woman because she has 'exposed' her face, he's the type who will sexually harass a woman wearing a veil, too. A friend of mine born in Srinagar returned a couple of years ago to visit some family and was shocked to see the men making cat-calls at women wearing niqabs and telling them to take it off.  Parda hataa do, indeed! (old Hindi song: "take off the veil") The veil does not do what most people claim it does (stop the sexual attention of men) and makes the 'forbidden fruit' more tempting in societies that are gender segregated. It objectifies women further because it puts up a barrier between women wearing it and people not wearing it, treating women like some fantastically tempting object that must be shut away lest society fall apart from the effect the faces of women have on men, and it's a lot easier to treat someone in a mean, nasty, or lecherous way when you're not even bothered with looking at their facial reactions. Just like how people who call in to a company will be a lot ruder than they would be if dealing with someone face to face... It's wrong for women to be held responsible for the behaviour of some lecherous men, which is what covering up the women in response to the behaviour of men does. It's like blaming the victim... I do digress from your original point, but I suppose what I'm trying to get at in my response is that I don't find the veil silly, more like wrong, but yeah, I'm well aware that this is a viewpoint that some orthodox Muslims do not share (though dislike of the niqab seems to be pretty widespread among Muslims, too, as it's only worn commonly in very orthodox societies like Iran or Saudi Arabia, where it's mandatory by law).
|
|
MrB
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/19/2006 11:00:31 AM When Jack Straw first made his comments, he was keen to emphasise that he is not anti-Muslim, and pointed out that he is a strong supporter of faith-based schools. He then went on to say that Muslim women should think hard about wearing the veil as it is a mark of separateness, thereby presumably making integration harder. There is a difficult debate to be had around multiculturalism, but I cannot see it reaching any rational conclusion when members of the cabinet are so muddled: faith-based schools are surely a much stronger promoter of separateness than wearing of the veil, and it was surprising to see Jack Straw claiming to be simultaneously in favour of the former and against the latter. |
|
smartypants
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/19/2006 11:11:23 AM basic point is personal choice , isnt it ? no one let alone govt ministers have right to tell anyone what they should wear or not . if school thinks her nqab is obstructing english teaching , they can fire her ( should be on her contract that either party can fire at will ) . i think debate is more to do with cultural dominance and ego . there is an election coming up and blair's govt is looking really bad and they need to show how they are true blue british and how they will uphold british culture . similarly woman is being unnecessarily stubborn ( she gave interview without veil so why is there now any problems ?) and insisting on veil to prove her dominance . i personally dont understand why anyone covering themselves is such a problem . they dont want to show their god given face to everyone , thats their choice . it is what you are brought up with . if you have been under niqab post puberty , how you can suddenly face men without cover ? it is not recommended thing to do . your objectification theory can be applied to anything , women wearing makeup , women wearing bikines . james , its not just irritating to see govt telling you to take off clothes , but very scary . already they must be facing so much intolerance given today's situations , now it will make muslims even more insecure and might cause bad things to happen in retaliation . i am with dill . btw dill, i hope dupatta can only be accussed of obstructing sex ed or stunting sexual development in students , not obstructing teaching of other subjects  . |
|
James.
Quote | Reply | This message was updated on 10/20/2006 11:37:50 AM by James. |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/20/2006 11:36:53 AM quote: I simply disagree with this point of view. Looking at it as an MP telling someone to 'take off clothes' puts it in the context of sexual perversity/abuse, which is simply not what is going on here, IMO. The MP is not getting his jollies seeing the face of the women he's speaking to, it has a non-sexual purpose. If he were requesting someone to show a little cleavage, show some thigh, etc., I'd have a very different reaction. Anyway, some articles from the BBC: 'No discrimination' in veil row MP tells veil woman 'let it go' |
|
smartypants
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/20/2006 12:16:20 PM quote: as dil was saying , one person's thigh is another's face . that is why taking clothes off is appropriate thing to say because veil is part of clothing . |
|
DW007
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/20/2006 7:00:21 PM I'm not sure if my view point is really politically incorrect or not. I'll just say it anyway. I think muslims should be allowed to wear their head scarfs and same goes for the other religious artifacts whether they are hindu, buddhist, jewish or christian. Also if the women want to wear the viel that only shows the eyes around their home, streets, public wherever is ok. But something about teaching children with it i find a bit off putting. I know its bad to tell someone to go against what their religion tells them to do. But i'm thinking about this from the childrens perspective. I have a 6 year old brother and i know he would be really scared seeing this scary woman in black with just her eyes showing. If you ask children what a stranger or bad guy looks like they often describe something in black that looks scary to them. So the fact they are teaching the children looking like that i think would be unsettling for children, considering they haven't learnt about tolerance of that kind of stuff yet. I mean they learn of tolerance of disabled and other cultures but i would say that kind of outfit is a more extreme case. I now draw the comparison if i went to Saudi Arabia or somewhere like that and decided to teach just wearing a short skirt and tank top. I know its not a religious thing, but what i mean is its something that society in Saudi Arabia would find unsettling and something they wouldnt like, in fact they have laws against people to stop it. Same thing goes for those children and others when people see only eyes - they find it unsettling and off putting. I'm sorry if i've offended anyone with my comments, its just coming off the top of my head and if you have other comments then i respect your differing opinion. |
|
melbguy
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/20/2006 11:22:50 PM i personally think the school has the right to sack someone if they think they are not doing or able to do the job right. But i dont see why are politicians comenting on this issue. It is just making the situation worse. things likes this will make the muslims in the west even more isolated and radical which is no good. |
|
chris750
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/21/2006 6:42:07 AM quote: Difference is we don't go round talking to one another's thighs. |
|
Dil Bert
Quote | Reply | |
U.K. targets the veil, and critics are asking why
replied on: 10/21/2006 8:40:11 AM quote: I think it's just a cultural difference: One Two Three Seriously, some cities ban wearing masks, etc. as a security move (much as England was looking at banning hooded sweatshirts). |
|
LinkBot
|
Gamers Wanted is looking for people to write game reviews and post news, |
|
|
| Tired of seeing ads? Click here to upgrade to Elite Membership! |
ChatArea.com Help & News Forums | Terms of Use | Contact ChatArea.com | Advertising
Powered By ChatArea.com - Get your free Society today! © Copyright 2003 Wewp!