This has been bugging me.

So Sarkozy is trying to ban the Birqua. A mayor in a small town in Italy has banned the "Birquiny", a full coverage bathing suit, at public pools. Denmark is equating the Birqua as support for or in league with the Taliban.

Is the Birqua scary? I live in Portland which is more of a melting pot than any other city I have ever been in. I live right down the street from a Mosque, right across the street from several families from Somalia, who where there version of the Burqua and next door to them are several conservative families of Muslims. Wives are routinely seen in full black Birqua, daughters have their heads covered.

Am I missing something? Is there something wrong here? I believe that in this case that just because it quacks doesn't mean its a duck. Telling a civilization to not wear what they deem appropriate is like asking the Mexicans to not speak Spanish. It is just a stripping away of identity. Maybe there are other problems in Europe that we as Americans are not aware of. If there are please educate me.

Not long ago I saw a documentary on the Apache Indians and Geronimo. They moved them to a reservation in Oklahoma I think it was and sent the children to schools where they were taught English, given haircuts and suits and made to look like the equivalent of Caucasians. They were forbidden to speak their language or practice their religion. I guess the thinking was our culture was so far superior that we were doing them a favor.

The Islamic culture certainly differs from western culture in their religious practices, attitudes to women and what constitutes the pursuit of happiness. Than there are the Islamic fundamentalists and worse the radicals. It is a knee jerk reaction to lump them all together.

From what I've read the Muslims in France for example are ghettoized and while their population is growing by leaps and bounds they have not assimilated into the French culture and have no desire to. I suppose the populace is reacting in whatever way they can to encourage assimilation and than there is the natural antagonism towards the 'other'.

This is one of the dilemmas of a democracy. We want to treat all people equally and allow them freedom of religion and the right to practice their culture. We sort of assume that they will conform to our culture and when they don't this creates friction. If we allow too many of them to immigrate they end up with political power and pretty soon it isn't the same country. So we have to be 'politically correct' but try going to their country and practicing your culture. :chop:

Watch the movie called Rabbit Proof Fence.

I work in an Islamic school where many of my students and fellow teachers are Muslim. Some of the girls only wear the hijub (head scarf) because it is part of their school uniform while others also chose to wear a veil also, which gives them a ninja look. As I understand it, the reasoning behind women in Islam having to cover up is just to protect them from lecherous old men. The same reasoning behind any father telling his daughter "You are not going out wearing THAT!"

As a teacher I personally don't like my students wearing a veil (ninja look) because it makes it almost impossible to read the student's face. Most students won't tell you if they understand, or what they are thinking. You have to read their faces. But this isn't a big concern as I only have one student who chooses the ninja look.

However, some of the mothers chose to wear the full black birqua where as most just wear a head scarf. But this in itself is helpful because it lets me know that I have to make sure I behave extra appropriately around the birqua clad mothers.

Actually it is the father's decision on who wears what.

And yes it is a strange form of birth control and terribly empowering to women.

What's that he just said Muslim women empowered? Yes. Think about it. The men find them so beautiful that they do not trust themselves with them. Women must have escorts, must be covered in conservative parts, must be made to look as unattractive as possible. If that is not power I do not know what is. Also remember that the house is the woman's place. She rules that place. The man has no power to tell her what to do in that house, especially the kitchen.

My wife is half Turkish. She went to visit her uncle a few years ago. He was strict, but no conservative. He required her to wear a Hajab whenever she went out, she required that she be escorted by her female cousin or he very large male cousin. She was not allowed out of the house alone.

It is a strange culture to be sure, but remember that we went through the same growing pain. Think about swimsuits. They have gone from full body suits to Brazilian String. Victorian Dress to the dress that we have today. Good lord short skirts just came into fashion some 50 years ago.

It reminds me of the line in a song off Frank Zappa's old "Freak Out" album from '66 or '67, "What is the ugliest part of your body?" Then the refrain goes."I think it's your mind."

So apparently the men from that culture either have a healthy mistrust of women or of themselves. The idea that in some cultures women's genitals are mutilated in infancy to assure that theywill never have sexual pleasure physically doesn't sound very empowering to me.

I just read an article about that. Apparently it is going by the wayside. FGM is usually done when the child is between 5 and 8 by midwives. Now it seems that there is an underground movement to stop this practice. Mothers are using henna body art to tell the midwife that she would not want this done and the midwives are being trained to "fake" the FGM. It is grass roots and picking up steam. Hopefully it will move very far forward. FWIW, FGM is not about eliminating pleasure it is about the husband knowing that his wife is a virgin. If the safety seal is broken, she is not a virgin.

I think that the men are not sure about each other.

Well, look at it historically from the view of the Italian. Think back to how they were really the first western country to have to deal with terrorism. Do you remember the bombings at the at the ROME Airport? This really is one of those issues that for sure there is two sides, but in the long run if you move to a new country then do not become part of the culture then the immigrant loses big time. Look at the most succesful immigrants in the USA, they all embraced the American dream and never looked back. Maybe cause I am first generation American, I feel such a love for my country and appreciation and at the same time can enjoy my ethnicity.
Think of it this way, you go to a party, you dress for the occasion, what is wrong with that?
M

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singlewedge

I just read an article about that. Apparently it is going by the wayside. FGM is usually done when the child is between 5 and 8 by midwives. Now it seems that there is an underground movement to stop this practice. Mothers are using henna body art to tell the midwife that she would not want this done and the midwives are being trained to "fake" the FGM. It is grass roots and picking up steam. Hopefully it will move very far forward. FWIW, FGM is not about eliminating pleasure it is about the husband knowing that his wife is a virgin. If the safety seal is broken, she is not a virgin.

I think that the men are not sure about each other.

---

So in other words there is an underground women's movement to keep their daughters from being mutilated. It has to be kept secret from the men and I wonder what the men would do, legally, to the women if they found out...........I'm thinking a divorce wouldn't be a part of it.

Yea this is a culture worth allowing to survive.

I'm not even talking about religion here, because this isn't in the Koran anywhere. This is purely a cultural bastardization of morals and should not be tolerated in any part of the world that calls itself free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singlewedge

Victorian Dress to the dress that we have today. Good lord short skirts just came into fashion some 50 years ago.

---

I wouldn't point to Victorian fashion as an example. It was the work of one particular person, a dictator, who was also by many accounts quite insane.

Power is the ability to make decisions on your own behalf if you have to listen to any outside authority you don't have it.

Wildtim - I had no idea that Victorian dress was a mandate. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildtim

I wouldn't point to Victorian fashion as an example. It was the work of one particular person, a dictator, who was also by many accounts quite insane.

Power is the ability to make decisions on your own behalf if you have to listen to any outside authority you don't have it.

---

Queen Victoria was a dictator? What have I missed? C'mon Tim clue me in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singlewedge

Actually it is the father's decision on who wears what.

---

I have never, ever, heard that before. Infact, when ever it is on TV here they have ALWAYS interviewed the mothers and asked how they would feel if their daughter CHOSE to wear the full kit.

IMO, it's all just xenophobia and people would be better off to get to know people on an individual basis, it's impossible to work any other way with out being lumbered with some prejudice around your neck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kingfish

Look at the most succesful immigrants in the USA
M

---

Based on what? According to who? Define Success.

Sorry, but you simply can't back that statement up unless you make assumptions about why they immigrated, and what they deem to be a success. It's effectively telling someone else what their quality of life is, and that cannot be done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregs656

Based on what? According to who? Define Success.

Sorry, but you simply can't back that statement up unless you make assumptions about why they immigrated, and what they deem to be a success. It's effectively telling someone else what their quality of life is, and that cannot be done.

---

If you don't believe in your self and culture and they are not worth sharing, you are right. Agree to disagree.
M

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregs656

Based on what? According to who? Define Success.

Sorry, but you simply can't back that statement up unless you make assumptions about why they immigrated, and what they deem to be a success. It's effectively telling someone else what their quality of life is, and that cannot be done.

---

Success-Being happy or at least living in persuit of happiness.

Happiness- Owning you own success and failure and not being jealous of others success.

All of course within limits of common sense and a few basic rules.

Tolerance
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/12/88...b565b545_b.jpg
It is our differences that make us fit together so beautifully

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregs656

I have never, ever, heard that before. Infact, when ever it is on TV here they have ALWAYS interviewed the mothers and asked how they would feel if their daughter CHOSE to wear the full kit.

IMO, it's all just xenophobia and people would be better off to get to know people on an individual basis, it's impossible to work any other way with out being lumbered with some prejudice around your neck.

---

Technically speaking. In conservative places I am sure that the women would have been beaten by her husband for talking out of turn. In the conservative parts you have to get permission from the man of the house to speak to any of the women in the house. Now I am sure that there are grades of conservative and that not all conservatives beat their wives for speaking out or need to ask permission before speaking to his wife/daughter. That being said, in Turkey, Istanbul to be precise, there exists both the old school conservative and the newschool conservative. The old school being above and the new school being that the women have more of a choice about what they where. That is not to say that the man still doesn't have the final say, but if they are part of a newer conservative movement the men may not have as much say as they used to. In which case the wife is probably honoring HER family by being covered. Being that it is her father's custom.

I am not even sure that any of that makes sense.:beer2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icedog

Tolerance
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/12/88...b565b545_b.jpg
It is our differences that make us fit together so beautifully

---

I can't believe that you got Mr. Toes to sit still. Was that after he beat the dog up or was he tired from an escape attempt?

I like to think I'm pretty tolerant of others cultural differences, however, there is a line and tolerance for wife beating and child mutilation is far beyond it.


I love how the same people who still scream about the oppression of women in this country are the same ones who jump to defend the "cultural differences" of a group of immigrants to another, when that culture gives the men the power of life and death over their women. Just somehow doesn't make sense to me.

Beating and mutilating people turns my stomach. However, I still respect the fact that the cultures are different. That is to say that if a man was to beat his wife or his family to mutilate his child that they should be held accountable to the laws of the country they reside in.

Complicated and maybe BS, but remember that most people that are conservative live in small villages and would probably never immigrate to the US or any other country. These practices are going the way of women tossing themselves on their husbands funeral pyres in India. Sooner the better, but until then we have to accept what they do and do our best to educate and not try to conform them to another lifestyle. :borg:

Ask Native Americans about conformity they will tell you about conformity.

Just a few random observations about some of the things I've seen in the thread so far:


I also had no idea that Victorian wear was due to a mandate.

It is my understanding that FGM is to keep females from experiencing pleasure during sex.

It's my understanding that, as a previous poster said, the women who cover themselves do so because the prevailing notion is that men cannot help themselves around uncovered women. Sort of the "she was asking for it" idea taken to the extreme.

The banning of the burquini (swimwear) is only part of a larger ban on many types of swimwear. To put it a different way, they are very restrictive about what you can wear in a public pool for hygienic reasons. (Men are required to wear speedo-style briefs.)

I'm surprised at the notion that the women rule in the home, lord of the kitchen, etc. (sorry for the poor paraphrasing). I've been told by some fairly conservative Muslims that the eldest male was The Man of the house, to be obeyed by all women therein. This can even mean a 12-year old boy if his father is away for some reason.

(Feel free to clarify whatever points I'm wrong about - it's how we learn.)

Quote:

---

This is purely a cultural bastardization of morals and should not be tolerated in any part of the world that calls itself free.

---

American freedoms are not the definition of freedom in other countries. In America we are supposed to have freedom to practice our religion (whichever that may be) and the freedom to observe our cultural customs. It is apparent that France does not share our ideals. I have long felt that it is arrogance for Americans to condemn other cultures for their practices, no matter how alien they are to the America way of life. We wouldn't accept the French, or any other country, telling us what freedoms should be allowed in America, so why should we think that we are free to tell another country how to run their government and their citizens' lives.

The American way is our prerogative in the U.S. but it is not to be forced on anyone. To do so is arrogant and is the same as dictators telling us how to run our country. There are limits to religious/cultural freedoms even in America. In one state a Muslim woman was denied a driver's license because she refused to uncover her face for the photo. It limits authorities ability to verify the identity of the licensee. In my home state, a driver's license is a privilege not a right. In another instance in America, a Muslim woman was denied access to her bank's lobby because she refused to uncover her face (policy at that bank required one to even remove their sun glasses when entering the lobby so identification on video surveillance equipment could be made more easily so it wasn't religious discrimination in this case either).

The exclusion of burkini's in public pools is supposed to be for hygiene reasons. I just don't see how a speedo will make a man more hygienic than swim trunks or a two piece bathing suit would make a woman more hygienic. In this instance, I think it was a way for the mayor to use his political power to exercise discrimination against Muslims and to harass this woman. But in a socialist society it is the good of the masses that is paramount and individual rights can be deprived arbitrarily by the authorities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MinniesMate

The exclusion of burkini's in public pools is supposed to be for hygiene reasons. I just don't see how a speedo will make a man more hygienic than swim trunks or a two piece bathing suit would make a woman more hygienic ...

---

This is the argument being made:

Why the enforced parading of Frenchmen's bulges? "Hygiene," says Emmanuel Dormois, a head pool attendant in Paris's 11th arrondissement. "Small, tight trunks can only be used for swimming. Bermudas or bigger swimming shorts can be worn elsewhere all day, so could bring in sand, dust or other matter, disturbing the water quality. By banning them outright, we're not forced to stand there measuring what can be defined as swimming shorts. I accept that some men feel very ill at ease wearing small trunks, but others don't mind."

Similar reports of enforced Speedos come from traumatised English visitors to a Belgian water park where bigger swimming shorts were also banned.
(source)

Kind of makes some sense, in a way. On the other hand, when I think of reasons to be squeamish about public pools, it has a lot more to do with sweaty sunbathers and hordes of small children with poor bladder control.

If the Burquini were worn for other activities I could see the argument. However most people do not go wandering the neighborhoods in a swimsuit no matter how revealing.

Again bogus argument, just another show of power.

As far as the women being lord of the house. She is master of her domain and WILL entertain her husbands guests. Think Bewtiched. That funny little sitcom from the 60s. The women organized the dinner party, served drinks and cigars, cleaned the kitchen and put the dishes away. Only mingling if there were other wives.

Kinda the same thought. Like I said earlier, some husbands are stricter than others. But I dare any man to attempt to enter a Muslim woman's kitchen. The women will chase you out and the men will call you a sissy.

...but I'd like to chime in with one of the interesting "patterns" I see coming about from this discussion. :OT The idea of different views of what is right and melding of multiple cultures is what makes civil rights such a hard list to define (aside from different countries/cultures not wanting to cooperate with other countries). I took a whole class on civil rights in college a couple years ago and that was one of the main things that I took away was the difficulty in extrapolating a reason for/understanding of customs and beliefs and then further creating a common ground which is fair and safe for all.

I apologize for not contributing much to the main thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singlewedge

If the Burquini were worn for other activities I could see the argument. However most people do not go wandering the neighborhoods in a swimsuit no matter how revealing.

Again bogus argument, just another show of power.

---

While I agree that the rule seems odd as far as hygiene goes, I don't quite get what you mean about the show of power. The Burquini was invented in Australia in 2007 -- after those French regulations were already in existence, so I think it's a mistake to assume that the rules were targeting Muslims (if that is indeed what you were suggesting).

I agree with you Tim. The closed minded attitude that attempts to justify a postion of superiority for one sex, or race or religion over another is the intolerance that inhibits social advancement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northpaw

This is the argument being made:

Why the enforced parading of Frenchmen's bulges? "Hygiene," says Emmanuel Dormois, a head pool attendant in Paris's 11th arrondissement. "Small, tight trunks can only be used for swimming. Bermudas or bigger swimming shorts can be worn elsewhere all day, so could bring in sand, dust or other matter, disturbing the water quality. By banning them outright, we're not forced to stand there measuring what can be defined as swimming shorts. I accept that some men feel very ill at ease wearing small trunks, but others don't mind."

Similar reports of enforced Speedos come from traumatised English visitors to a Belgian water park where bigger swimming shorts were also banned.
(source)

Kind of makes some sense, in a way. On the other hand, when I think of reasons to be squeamish about public pools, it has a lot more to do with sweaty sunbathers and hordes of small children with poor bladder control.

---

I agree with your last observation, but, I guess the reason I think swim trunks (swim shorts if you will) and burkinis would be alright is that here in the U.S. health officials regulate public swimming pools and require that all public swimming pools must either be treated with chlorine to disinfect the water or have salt treated water (the system converts the sodium chloride into chlorine and the special filter system converts the chlorine back into sodium chloride thus being a closed loop always having the proper amount of chlorine in the water.). I guess Europeans don't subscribe to the same level of sanitation in their public swimming pools. I think I will leave my swim suit at home and just "people watch" the swimmers and sun bathers if I ever decide to go to Europe.