Fresh Attacks on Niqab in UK Government

[ardianto]

The real problem is that deep down, western cultures find it difficult to believe that women had a genuine freedom of choice when they adopted the niqab/hijab - even if the women themselves say so. The reasons for this are historical.

As I've said, Muslim scholar in my place do not force women to wear hijab, but motivate them to wear it. And they motivate because wear or not wear hijab is not about choice, but about willingness.

A Muslim woman wear hijab not because she chooses to wear it, but because she is willing to wear it. Even wear hijab as a choice like just to follow mode is not suggested because it will make a woman sometime wear hijab sometime wear not.

Majority of women who wear hijab in my place wear it in 30's age although there are who wear it since 20's or teens, or over 40, over 50. It's depend on when will they ready to wear hijab.

So, if a Muslim woman wear hijab because she is willing to wear it, is a coercion?. It's depend on the mindset of those who see this matter. Muslims who fast in Ramadhan can be seen as coerced too although Muslims themselves who are fasting see it as a willingness to obey the command.

But I cannot deny a fact that in certain Muslim communities there are women who coerced to wear hijab or niqab by people around them although those women themselves haven't ready to wear it. But we cannot generalize it as all Muslim women coerced to wear hijab/niqab.

 

[Pygoscelis]

That being said, men do not have a "right" to see women's faces. Men do not have a "right" to see women's hair and neck. Men do not have a "right" to see women's shoulders, arms, and legs. Men do not have a "right" to see the rest of a woman's body. The same cultures and nations that often promote the phony notion of "freedom" are often the same cultures and nations that work overtime to take women's freedom away when it comes to personal privacy.

What if I try walking nude in the city? I don't just get strange looks like niqabi women get. I get arrested. I don't just get rude words in my direction, or even merely suspected as a criminal. I am declared a criminal (and a pervert), all because of my choice to walk as I was born. This cultural standard works against both ends of the spectrum.

I agree that you should be allowed to cover your body completely. I'm doubting you'll agree that I should be allowed to go completely uncovered. Keep in mind that I don't share your religious views and I may hypothetically even have religious views of my own (perhaps new age pagan) that forbids clothing.

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

What if I try walking nude in the city? I don't just get strange looks like niqabi women get. I get arrested. I don't just get rude words in my direction, or even merely suspected as a criminal. I am declared a criminal (and a pervert), all because of my choice to walk as I was born. This cultural standard works against both ends of the spectrum.

The law on this depends on where you live:

Under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 it is not an offence to be naked in public in England and Wales. It becomes an offence if it can be proved the person stripped off with the intention to cause distress, alarm or outrage.


Then they run the risk of three possible offences, says a spokesman for law firm Kingsley Napley. These are:


• Indecent exposure - an offence under section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003
• Intentional harassment, alarm or distress under section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986
• "Outraging public decency" under common law


If a case did get to court the onus would be on the prosecution to prove this intention to upset. If found guilty, the offender would face anything from a fine to several years in prison.


In Scottish law there is no statutory offence, just the common law offence of offending public decency - a strand of the breach of the peace. The test is essentially the same as in English law - that a member of the public has been put in a state of fear or alarm.

Got this from here, but be advised there is an inapproprate picture there. So the summary, as provided in the link, is: 'It's not an offence to be naked in public in England and Wales. Becomes offence if it can be proved the person stripped off with the intention to upset and shock.'

I agree that you should be allowed to cover your body completely. I'm doubting you'll agree that I should be allowed to go completely uncovered. Keep in mind that I don't share your religious views and I may hypothetically even have religious views of my own (perhaps new age pagan) that forbids clothing.

From an atheist/secular viewpoint, it makes no difference to allow nudity because there is no concept of sin, in the same way they call for freedom to practice homosexuality and the freedom to insult sacred things. The concept of absolute freedom and equality is promoted even if it means harm and injustice will result. Even so, one might argue there is still the concept of natural disposition which is deeply embedded in human nature. This explains why adults and children alike are disturbed by the sight of a naked person and why a law would have to be made about this, particularly under a 'sexual offences act'. And combining this with religious understanding, it is something that traces back to Adam and Eve who sought to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise following their mistake which caused their nakedness to be revealed. On the other hand, a woman covering herself has always tended to be an act of virtue and modesty - the example of nuns and images of Mary (peace be upon her) have already preceded. With these thoughts in mind, it is not a simple case of inconsistency, rather a case of two very different things being compared.

The main focus is that if it is not an offence in England/Wales/Scotland to be naked, why would it be an offence for Muslim women to wear the Hijab/veil?

 

[ardianto]

Yesterday I was shopping in a busy supermarket where the visitors wore various model of clothes. There were who dressed formally, there were who dressed casually, there were women with hijab, there were women with mini skirts or short pants. And there was a woman who wore niqab.

Niqab actually is rare in Indonesia, a Muslim majority country where people are trendy and the youth are easy to be influenced by pop culture in dressing. But I noticed, no one paid attention to her. Me too, because I thought in a place where people can choose dressing style that they like, what's wrong if a woman choose niqab as her dress?.

I wore jean and t-shirt when I visited that supermarket and no one being offended because I didn't do something wrong that could offend other people like mocking or being rude. So, why people must being offended by a woman who wear niqab if she didn't do something wrong that offend the other?.

 

[Berries'forest]

I agree that you should be allowed to cover your body completely. I'm doubting you'll agree that I should be allowed to go completely uncovered. Keep in mind that I don't share your religious views and I may hypothetically even have religious views of my own (perhaps new age pagan) that forbids clothing.

Actually you don't technically you are saying this as a conditional statement. In other words, you'd only fully support woman wearing veils if they in turn return your 'favor' by allowing you to walk unclothed in public. How can you use this analogy to refer to double standards there are no double standards If one lives under a secular community then that system should as follows protect their rights to their privacy and personal choices.

i respect what you have to say about the Islamic reasons for the niqab, but to describe the western attitude as an agenda based on a desire to remove women's privacy is flat wrong. If western women wished to reconsider their own emancipation and started a movement to cover up, there's nothing in the world that would stop them.

The real problem is that deep down, western cultures find it difficult to believe that women had a genuine freedom of choice when they adopted the niqab/hijab - even if the women themselves say so. The reasons for this are historical.

Independent, why does it concern you so much if a woman wants to conceal her face. I'm genuinely wondering why?. How does that affect you?. Better yet, can you actually explain in a sensible manner how a woman covering her face has any negative effect or impact on your personal life or private issues?. It seems you're taking this too close to heart. You as a male should care no more about a woman's clothing than you care of someone deciding to spend the rest of their life eating vegetables. It simply has nothing to do with you and everything to do with them. The let's ban it all since we can't prove that they all wear it of conviction doesn't bind well. Maybe you should be more open minded and stop imposing western conduct codes on everyone. The world does not revolve around Europe you can't dissolve and erase other cultures that have existed for years and centuries by your rationale maybe you should appreciate diversity or if you aren't capable of appreciating diversity just move on live and let live. That would solve the problem.

 

[Independent]

Independent, why does it concern you so much if a woman wants to conceal her face. I'm genuinely wondering why?. How does that affect you?

No, I expressly said that I don't mind what people do:

Personally, so long as there is genuinely no duress either way, I don't mind what people do.

I stress both halves of that sentence: 'I don't mind' and 'so long as there is genuinely no duress either way'.

Having said that, if I'm honest, perhaps there are limits to my not caring. If I lived in a society where I was obstructed from relating to all women, not just a few, I would certainly feel the loss. (If anything I've had more women friends than male through my life. And also more women bosses.) I would be hugely sad to be cut off from that. I feel my life, and my society would be poorer for it in every respect. Women can bring out the best in men and vice versa.

But at an individual level I am happy for people to choose what they want in this as in a thousand other things which you might object to.

 

[observer]

From an atheist/secular viewpoint, it makes no difference to allow nudity because there is no concept of sin, in the same way they call for freedom to practice homosexuality and the freedom to insult sacred things. The concept of absolute freedom and equality is promoted even if it means harm and injustice will result.

Just a quick point - atheism is not a single viewpoint. You will find atheist homophobes and those who hate the idea of public nudity. It is a huge mistake (often repeated by the religious) to lump atheists together as a group with a single focus. An arab atheist will likely have very different views to a European atheist who will have different views to a South American atheist. Atheism is one thing - a lack of belief in god. Atheism doesn't "promote" anything.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Even so, one might argue there is still the concept of natural disposition which is deeply embedded in human nature. This explains why adults and children alike are disturbed by the sight of a naked person and why a law would have to be made about this, particularly under a 'sexual offences act'.

I don't believe that for a second. Babies have no issue with nudity. Not until they are culturally programmed to be ashamed for their bodies do people concern themselves with nudity.

The main focus is that if it is not an offence in England/Wales/Scotland to be naked, why would it be an offence for Muslim women to wear the Hijab/veil?

I agree. However, I point out that the standard of decency, privacy, and what is cosidered normal will vary from place to place. In some places (ie, Wales as you say) covering completely is not culturally allowed. In others (ie, where the niqabi women often come from) being completely naked isn't. I find it hypocritical to come from one culture into the other and complain about it.

 

[Pygoscelis]

I agree that you should be allowed to cover your body completely.

Actually you don't technically you are saying this as a conditional statement.

How is that a conditional statement? I support your right to cover your face, regardless of your desire to force clothes on me. I just find it rather hypocritical for you to do that and then argue free choice.

 

[ardianto]

If I lived in a society where I was obstructed from relating to all women, not just a few, I would certainly feel the loss.

But, you are not living in society like that.

Okay, I understand if you would certainly feel the loss if you were obstructed from relating to all women, not just a few. Me too.

Just like other Muslim boys, I learned Qur'an since I was kid, with my brother, few other boys, and few girls. We learned together from same teacher in same time, same room.

Then in the school I learned Islam in classroom together with female student. Like I've ever said that I meet my wife in the classroom in high school. Graduated from high school, I studied economic in an Islamic university with female students too.

Muslim scholars in my place do not forbid male and female to know each other and do activities together. They just give us guidance of etiquette in relationship between men and women. Different than Muslim scholars in Saudi Arabia which very strict in prohibit mixed gender study and activities. But I am not living in Saudi Arabia. So this prohibition does not affect me.

I understand if people in the West are worry that one day their society will turn into society like in Saudi although sometime I think this worries is too excessive. In fact now the Western people are still in their life style.

And I also understand why the niqabi in the West cannot change their niqab (face veil) into hijab (headscarves) like proposed by few people in the West.

Frankly, my hope is two parties can discuss with cool mind to get a win-win solution. The non-Muslims do not again see niqab as threat for their Western civilization, and the (radical) Muslims stop their provocative action like forcing Sharia for the West with use niqab as symbol of (their version of) Sharia.

But actually not every niqabi is 'rigid'. There are niqabis who nice, friendly and can respect people from other belief.

 

[Berries'forest]

I just find it rather hypocritical for you to do that and then argue free choice.

Would you really support something I do that you find hypocritical. I recall that you stated you are no less in support of pushing validation of niqab than you are supporting publicly nudity. It is my free choice to wear whatever I want. And you're arguing against negatives.You make it appear that nudity is the natural state of human life while in reality it's not. Yes, you are born undressed but the moment you're out of the womb you're immediately dressed or covered by a piece of clothing otherwise the difference in temperature can be a real threat to your health. Besides there are no positive or productive outcomes in walking unclothed, while there's hardly any harm in covering up. I don't understand why it is men who usually are the ones who oppose to women covering up. I'm wondering if a woman covering up hurts your feelings because she is sending out rejection signals or is it that it's really about time men leave feminine issues alone and respect what women have to say and want to do. Not just for the majority who conform to their views but also to the minority who do wish in fact to cherish their bodies and not sell them selves. We have far higher record than anytime in issues with body image and self-esteem I don't seem how pushing for a law that proposes public acceptance of nudity to have a advantage or be of any benefit it would more likely increase indecency in behavior, more body image issues and low self-esteem problems and not to mention that blatant invasion of one's privacy and right to confidentiality. In conclusion the comparison of covering up to nudity fails in all aspects in that they have contrasting outcomes and consequences and I don't find it hypocritical at all.

 

[Berries'forest]

Having said that, if I'm honest, perhaps there are limits to my not caring. If I lived in a society where I was obstructed from relating to all women, not just a few, I would certainly feel the loss. (If anything I've had more women friends than male through my life. And also more women bosses.) I would be hugely sad to be cut off from that. I feel my life, and my society would be poorer for it in every respect. Women can bring out the best in men and vice versa.

And where just where and when exactly did any muslim woman declare the desire to launch a campaign enforcing niqab on every other woman muslim or non-muslim. The women who you speak of in your life are not affected by niqab anymore than I am affected by a woman uncovering her head in the street. Maybe you are coming to realize that it's nothing to do with you since no one here is advocating that people should wear it willy-nilly rather that the ones who are currently observing it should have their rights preserved and respected. You're boss can and probably does walk into the work environment wearing a skirt that goes just above her knees along with a sleeveless cleavage revealing top and no one ever complains that her dress code causes distraction and comes in the way of the working ethic. Yet a woman who peacefully walk in covered is often looked down on as traditional old-fashion and with no sense of style. It very slightly has to do with regulations of personal choice and more to do with conformity to societal standards of what and how a woman should behave like and since modesty and bashfulness are outlawed by promiscuity and the more you show in a woman's case the more acceptance and appraise you'll receive I find it hard to believe you have in it's minimum any concern for those women who wear against their choice, which is rare even in Islamic societies niqab isn't as well received in muslim households as you're trying to claim.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Would you really support something I do that you find hypocritical.

Support your right to do it? Yes. Why not? We do that all the time.

You make it appear that nudity is the natural state of human life while in reality it's not.

Yes it is.

Yes, you are born undressed but the moment you're out of the womb you're immediately dressed or covered by a piece of clothing otherwise the difference in temperature can be a real threat to your health.

Depends entirely on where you are and what the climate or climate control is. Sometimes clothing is useful. But often it isn't needed. Same goes for a lot of human inventions.

I don't understand why it is men who usually are the ones who oppose to women covering up.

I know plenty of female nudists.

I'm wondering if a woman covering up hurts your feelings because she is sending out rejection signals

I'm wondering if a woman or man going naked hurts your feelings because they are not conforming to your demands of "decency".

or is it that it's really about time men leave feminine issues alone and respect what women have to say and want to do. Not just for the majority who conform to their views but also to the minority who do wish in fact to cherish their bodies and not sell them selves.

And those who wish to feel the freedom of being nude.

We have far higher record than anytime in issues with body image and self-esteem I don't seem how pushing for a law that proposes public acceptance of nudity to have a advantage or be of any benefit it would more likely increase indecency in behavior, more body image issues and low self-esteem problems and not to mention that blatant invasion of one's privacy and right to confidentiality.

How is choosing to be naked a invasion of anyone's privacy or confidentiality? And why do you think that more people walking naked will cause an increase in body image issues? Its not like we can't tell somebody is fat whether they wear clothes or not. And if somebody has a scar they would like to hide, nobody would be stopping them. I'm not saying we should have mandatory nudity. I'm saying people should have the freedom to choose, be that the choice to fully cover themselves, or not cover themselves at all.

In conclusion the comparison of covering up to nudity fails in all aspects in that they have contrasting outcomes and consequences and I don't find it hypocritical at all.

You demand the freedom to choose. But you are one sided about it.

I can understand both the strict muslim and the liberal nudist. I think I'm the only one here that can.

 

[faithandpeace]

I reject the idea that all knowledge, cultures, religions, and viewpoints are inherently "equal" to one another. Hence, I reject the notion that the right to veil would be equally valid to the right to go nude much in the same way that I would not consider a culture that does human sacrifices as equal to one that prohibits the practice. Intellectual "neutrality" or "the balancing" of ideas is not the path to truth and justice.

 

[Berries'forest]

Well, this is going to be long..

Support your right to do it? Yes. Why not? We do that all the time.

That was rhetoric.

Yes it is.

Depends entirely on where you are and what the climate or climate control is. Sometimes clothing is useful. But often it isn't needed. Same goes for a lot of human inventions.

I'm not sure many children's health care experts would agree. Alright then, leave aside our nature of being born undressed and consider the fact the we are born with our eyes shut. That is the natural state in which we are born, we slowly and gradually after learn to open our eyes and embrace the vision with are granted. How about a law that entail people to walk around with their eyes shut since there's no shame and harm and afterall we were born that way. Moreover, when we are born we don't automatically walk I would say it is wholly out of nature to see a new born baby immediately pickup walking, although that we have been programmed that walkling is a vital function for our daily lives and yet there's not a single person arguing that we should dispose of walking since it's only second nature and we weren't born that way. We don't crawl anymore unless we want to be a public laughing stock or imitate animals yet walking isn't viewed that way. Taking in this into your arguement I would say there is nothing more unnatural for us humans to do than walking and running and infact being slow or unable to move or incapable of walking should using this logic be perfectly acceptable.

I know plenty of female nudists.

And this is relevant how?. Unless you haven't realized nudity is actually and contrary to what you trying to propose very much widely accepted it is in fact much more accepted than covering up with a veil. We don't see many magazines being sold around that portray the veil as much as there are ones who portray the alter. Yet most of the participants in this thread are actually males and not females.

I'm wondering if a woman or man going naked hurts your feelings because they are not conforming to your demands of "decency".

No they don't hurt my feelings but I would say they disturb my vision.

And those who wish to feel the freedom of being nude.

I don't really make laws. But you are making unmeetable demands. You want me to repress my right to cover up and then advocate other people's rights to walk around unclothed. That's hardly reasonable.

How is choosing to be naked a invasion of anyone's privacy or confidentiality? And why do you think that more people walking naked will cause an increase in body image issues? Its not like we can't tell somebody is fat whether they wear clothes or not. And if somebody has a scar they would like to hide, nobody would be stopping them. I'm not saying we should have mandatory nudity. I'm saying people should have the freedom to choose, be that the choice to fully cover themselves, or not cover themselves at all.

You'd be surprised by the amount of women who prefer not to show their bodies. And yes just like leaving my house open for everyone to see and dwell in is an invasion of privacy the same goes with exposing my body parts to the public. I can't believe we're even discussing this. I did also make a point that niqab are rare and extreme cases and that it's not the norm why have you over looked this?.

 

[Independent]

And where just where and when exactly did any muslim woman declare the desire to launch a campaign enforcing niqab on every other woman muslim or non-muslim

i didn't say they were, i just said I would be sorry to live in a society that inhibited me from interacting with women (which is a wider subject than just the niqab). It's not even about women in particular, I'd be just as unhappy if it was men who were withdrawing.

Women can choose to do what they want and that includes totally ignoring me. (I've had practise in putting up with this.)

The kind of society ardianto describes sounds good to me. And when i spent a couple of months in Indonesia many years ago that did seem to be the way things worked.

I find it hard to believe you have in it's minimum any concern for those women who wear against their choice, which is rare even in Islamic societies

I have no idea about numbers either way, it's a hard thing to measure. Again, I believe women should be left free to choose either way. If you also think that, that we are in agreement.

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

Just a quick point - atheism is not a single viewpoint.

Thanks for pointing that out. Although I think in some ways there is a commonality with all atheists here, which is that they have no concept of sin and right and wrong is not determined by a divine authority, which then influences how they view things. But regarding different opinions on nudity etc, I'll try to bear that in mind.

I don't believe that for a second. Babies have no issue with nudity. Not until they are culturally programmed to be ashamed for their bodies do people concern themselves with nudity.

How do you know that babies have no issue with nudity - they are very limited in their ability to express what they desire or dislike. Babies do a number of things without being 'programmed' by human beings. They sometimes go into a corner or hide themselves when they want to relieve themselves. Likewise there are a number of things that humans in general would simply not do out of their sense of innate shame.

I agree. However, I point out that the standard of decency, privacy, and what is cosidered normal will vary from place to place. In some places (ie, Wales as you say) covering completely is not culturally allowed. In others (ie, where the niqabi women often come from) being completely naked isn't. I find it hypocritical to come from one culture into the other and complain about it.

I don't think there has really been a complaint by such people against nudity, at least not on the scale of the complaints against Hijab/Niqab. What we are discussing is more from a hypothetical view exploring why one should be allowed and not the other.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Alright then, leave aside our nature of being born undressed and consider the fact the we are born with our eyes shut. That is the natural state in which we are born, we slowly and gradually after learn to open our eyes and embrace the vision with are granted. How about a law that entail people to walk around with their eyes shut since there's no shame and harm and afterall we were born that way.

I am not aware of any laws banning closing your eyes in public. If you start walking around and bumping into people, or driving with your eyes closed (or obstructed by a face covering) then you should be held liable, but otherwise, does anybody really care? Should they? Likewise with nudity or wearing a burqa. If its actually harming others (ie, posing an identity or security risk, or posing a hygiene risk) that is one thing, but a ban just because it offends somebody is quite another.

And this is relevant how?. Unless you haven't realized nudity is actually and contrary to what you trying to propose very much widely accepted it is in fact much more accepted than covering up with a veil.

Huh? There are laws against public nudity. You can get arrested in many (if not most) parts of the world for walking down the street naked. There are not many places where you'll get arrested for wearing a face veil. Try both and report back to me if you don't believe me.

We don't see many magazines being sold around that portray the veil as much as there are ones who portray the alter. Yet most of the participants in this thread are actually males and not females.

First, what do those two sentences have to do with one another? Why does it matter if there are more males than females writing here?

Second, the taboo of nudity is what makes nudie magazines sell. And they don't sell all that well. Not unless you are referring to full on porn magazines which are much more graphic than mere nudity.

I don't really make laws. But you are making unmeetable demands. You want me to repress my right to cover up and then advocate other people's rights to walk around unclothed. That's hardly reasonable.

Where did I demand that you repress your right to cover up?

My only concern with face veils is where security or identity become important issues, like on driver's licenses or when voting or in banks. Otherwise, I don't care what you wear. You can wear whatever you want, or nothing at all.

You'd be surprised by the amount of women who prefer not to show their bodies.

Not as much as you think. Hence, why I fully support their right not to show their bodies if they don't want to. But I can tell that you would be very surprised by the amount of women who are not ashamed of their bodies and would like the freedom to be nude.

I did also make a point that niqab are rare and extreme cases and that it's not the norm why have you over looked this?.

So is public nudity.

 

[ardianto]

My only concern with face veils is where security or identity become important issues, like on driver's licenses or when voting or in banks.

My niqabi customer always drive her own car when she comes to my office, and I am sure if I could see her driver license I could know her face because wearing niqab in driver license photo in Indonesia is forbidden.

To be honest, in the driver license case like that happened in USA, I do not stand with niqabi that still want to to wear niqab in driver license photo. But in case like in UK when niqabi were banned to wear niqab in campus, I stand with niqabi because not difficult to recognize that "she is really she is". I can recognize my niqabi friend and customer from their voices and way of speak.

In voting?. Someone who know her can guarantee that she is not someone else. In bank? her husband or someone can open an account for her.

Ban niqab in public place?. Oh, please respect the freedom to live under religious rule. If the niqabi didn't do something wrong, why they should be banned to wear niqab?.

Actually there's always a solution for the issue of the niqab in the West if both parties are willing to tolerate each other.

 

[Independent]

Actually there's always a solution for the issue of the niqab in the West if both parties are willing to tolerate each other

This whole thing has become a problem because it's been politicised. Individual women have been wearing, or not wearing, niqabs in the UK for decades. Now suddenly it's a big issue either way. It's become a political statement.

Ban niqab in public place?. Oh, please respect the freedom to live under religious rule.

I wouldn't worry. Just because one idiot stands up and says he's on favour of a public ban doesn't mean is going to happen. No way will this happen in the UK. Limited restrictions in court, in security situations or in certain professions are more debatable and there will continue to be issues here.