Philosophy Now Forum

Brandon Robshaw wonders what the attitude of liberal states should be towards face coverings for women.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/135/Should_a_Liberal_State_Ban_the_Burqa

Ban the burqa, ban the habit, ban the public boxers and thigh-high trousers or keep taking antibacterial wipes on the subway, ban the competing designer in this fall’s Milan lineup. Or, ban none of them.

The problem with the burqa is not the burqa as fashion but with the misogynistic behaviors associated with the burqa that may infringe on individual human rights and thus be illegal, whether or not the victim knows it.

You wanna wear one? Go ahead, ain't nobody's business if you do, just like it ain't your business if the other ladies don't.

Now if the other ladies don't wanna associate with you cuz of your burqa, that's a different matter. Not a one are obligated to hang with you. Hell, if any of those ladies like, they can, to the degree you're willin to listen', tell you why they think your burqa is ugly and dumb (just as you can, to the degree those non-burqa wearin' whores will listen, tell them they are, in fact, non-burqa wearin' whores).

What they don't get to do is: make you stop wearin' your ugly, dumb burqa.

What you don't get to do is: make them whores wear burqas.

Your gov ought not be doin' any different.

Philosophy Now wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 1:12 pm Brandon Robshaw wonders what the attitude of liberal states should be towards face coverings for women.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/135/Sh ... _the_Burqa

Should we ban discrimination against women? Probably. Should we teach women not to be ashamed of their faces? Probably. Should we teach them that they are not the possessions of their culture? Probably. Should we integrate them fully in our modern institutions, and encourage them to participate to the same level men do? Probably. Should we teach them that legally, a woman's value is equal to a man's? Probably. Should we allow them to participate with men fully in society, school and the workplace? Probably.

Should we stop sharia, female circumcision, forced marriages, bride burnings, dowries, sex slavery and revenge rapes? Definitely.

Can anybody think of a reason why we shouldn't?

freedom of religion ...

the liberal state will force gay weddings in mosques before they ban burkas... what will the gay husband wear after all?

-Imp

Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:51 pm freedom of religion ...

the liberal state will force gay weddings in mosques before they ban burkas... what will the gay husband wear after all?

-Imp

Hey, that's funny.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 5:26 pm You wanna wear one? Go ahead, ain't nobody's business if you do, just like it ain't your business if the other ladies don't.

Now if the other ladies don't wanna associate with you cuz of your burqa, that's a different matter. Not a one are obligated to hang with you. Hell, if any of those ladies like, they can, to the degree you're willin to listen', tell you why they think your burqa is ugly and dumb (just as you can, to the degree those non-burqa wearin' whores will listen, tell them they are, in fact, non-burqa wearin' whores).

What they don't get to do is: make you stop wearin' your ugly, dumb burqa.

What you don't get to do is: make them whores wear burqas.

Your gov ought not be doin' any different.

Henry, you must my more attention to experts. A person wearing cross will be cautiond not to wear it on company time. Now a girl wearind a burqa will be welcomed in as poltically correct. If you don't understnd it it is a lack of education on your part. listen and bow to our experts. They know what is best for you.

Note the Normal Distribution where perversions are represented by a very small percentile at both ends.

If the Burga is only practiced by a small percentile of Muslim women then there is no issue.
However the Burga at present is worn by the majority of Muslim women and perhaps 100% in certain majority-Muslims countries where it is enforced by Laws.
This is so evident everywhere as compared to what was say, merely 30-50 years ago.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ghts#img-1

Young women wearing mini-skirts walking down the street in the city of Kabul, 1972.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ghts#img-2

As such with the practice of wearing of the Burga by the majority of Muslim women, this is turned into an ideological issue.
If we are to dig deep into the ideology of Islam and Muslim-women wearing the Burga, there is an indication of coercion from the ideology of Islam. Wear the Burga or be punished in hell or by the authorities.
Since liberalism opposes the infringement of the basic right of the individual - no coercion, the Burga should be banned.

It's a difficult question to answer for many of the reasons highlighted in the article as well as in this thread. I suppose if someone wants to voluntarily cover their face because they're incredibly shy then it's their business, however, it would be pretty ridiculous to do so. It's even more ridiculous as a religious obligation. This is why it's so hard to have a free and liberal society, because some people just have to make it difficult.

What a Liberal State should do is ban the compulsion to wear the Burqa.

How about banning other forms of face covering like medical masks??

If liberty is what you want then no form of clothing ought to be banned, but every girl or woman living in a liberal state ought to be able to choose to wear one or not.

Banning the burqa would set a precedent that would empower the state to ban other forms of clothing. As the surveillance obsession continues people would start taking to wearing masks for the protection of privacy.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 3:07 am A person wearing cross will be cautiond not to wear it on company time. Now a girl wearind a burqa will be welcomed in as poltically correct..

This is simply false.

Henry, you must my more attention to experts. A person wearing cross will be cautiond not to wear it on company time. Now a girl wearind a burqa will be welcomed in as poltically correct. If you don't understnd it it is a lack of education on your part. listen and bow to our experts. They know what is best for you.

I shall wallow in the mud of my ignorance and bite the face off anyone who tries to move me.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:49 am

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 3:07 am A person wearing cross will be cautiond not to wear it on company time. Now a girl wearind a burqa will be welcomed in as poltically correct..

This is simply false.

You had better check the big book on poltical correctness. The expers have spoken and woe be all who defy them

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 165368.stm

A British Airways (BA) employee has lost her fight to openly wear a cross necklace at work at Heathrow.
Nadia Eweida, 55, of Twickenham, London, has been on unpaid leave since her bosses said she could not visibly wear her cross at the check-in counter.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:10 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:49 am

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 3:07 am A person wearing cross will be cautiond not to wear it on company time. Now a girl wearind a burqa will be welcomed in as poltically correct..

This is simply false.

You had better check the big book on poltical correctness. The expers have spoken and woe be all who defy them

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 165368.stm

A British Airways (BA) employee has lost her fight to openly wear a cross necklace at work at Heathrow.
Nadia Eweida, 55, of Twickenham, London, has been on unpaid leave since her bosses said she could not visibly wear her cross at the check-in counter.

This link does not support your assertion.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 5:43 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:10 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 11:49 am

This is simply false.

You had better check the big book on poltical correctness. The expers have spoken and woe be all who defy them

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 165368.stm

A British Airways (BA) employee has lost her fight to openly wear a cross necklace at work at Heathrow.
Nadia Eweida, 55, of Twickenham, London, has been on unpaid leave since her bosses said she could not visibly wear her cross at the check-in counter.

This link does not support your assertion.

How does the story as told in the link not support his assertion? I mean, it looks like it does to me.