20 March 2012

Burqa laws hit the Assembly

| johnboy
Join the conversation
77
burqa

Simon Corbell has announced the start of debate on burqa laws in the ACT:

The new laws, if passed, will also be used in situations under the road transport legislation when it is necessary to confirm a person?s identity, such as when a person is applying for a driver licence or having their photo taken for inclusion on their driver licence.

Mr Corbell reinforced that this legislation was not targeting any particular cultural group, and community groups had been consulted during the development stages of the legislation.

“The Government understands that this may be perceived as action to target a certain group in the community, but it is crucial to point out that cultural sensitivities have been taken into account when drafting the legislation,” Mr Corbell said.

“The laws include an option for a female with a head-covering to request that it only be removed in the presence of a female police officer in a private place in accordance with their cultural beliefs and practices.

“This new law is predominantly in response to previous cases where motorists have refused to remove items such as motorcycle helmets, balaclavas, large sunglasses and hoodies.”

A special defence applies where wearing the item that covers all or part of the person?s face is necessary for the person?s medical treatment. In such cases, the person is not required to remove that item.

Hard to see the Liberals saying no to this.

[Photo by tinou bao CC BY]

Join the conversation

77
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

astrojax said :

The simple fact is some cultures are rubbish, and some cultural practices are rubbish.

whoa, there, henry… especially on harmony day, a bit of a long bow to label whole cultures ‘rubbish’, though thoroughly agree with the lesser, second clause.

Nail has been hit on the head.

The simple fact is some cultures are rubbish, and some cultural practices are rubbish.

whoa, there, henry… especially on harmony day, a bit of a long bow to label whole cultures ‘rubbish’, though thoroughly agree with the lesser, second clause.

Blen_Carmichael said :

“The laws include an option for a female with a head-covering to request that it only be removed in the presence of a female police officer in a private place in accordance with their cultural beliefs and practices.

Not practical. Most dayshift patrol cars are manned by only one officer, and there’s a 50/50 chance it’s a man. Even if it’s a female officer, I doubt she could be bothered going through the palaver of organising a private place for the subject to unveil. Also, what do you do with the three bewildered children in the back who are wondering where the police are taking mum? Chances are that for the routine stops, police will simply accept the ID without insisting on the subject unveiling. Back to square one.

Very practical. If the car is pulled over by a male who is alone, the following will have to happen.
– Person is stopped as part of usual traffic police operation.
– Person is wearing face covering, and indicates that for religious or cultural reasons, they will require to be taken to a private place and be identified by a female officer.
– Because person has three children with her, social services must be called to take charge of children while person is identified.
– Male police officer takes woman to the nearest private place (probably a police station).
– Female police officer makes her way to private place
– Female police officer identifies person.
– Person is returned to car, and then goes and retrieves their children from child services.

Time taken to confirm drivers identity, 12 hours.

Deref said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

This one isn’t.

I think, and I’ve said so in other threads, that the subjugation of women under Islam (or Christianity, for that matter) is an abomination. But I don’t think the law is a remedy. Time is. I can’t see the children and grandchildren of these women being nearly as ready to knuckle under to iron age superstition and misogynistic dictates.

In the meantime, this law seems like a practical compromise.

So…we should do away with anti-sexual-discrimination and anti-racism laws as well because Time will take care of it, eventually?

I think not.

The problem is the modern fad of pretending everything and everybody is equal and equally valid.
It just isn’t true.
The simple fact is some cultures are rubbish, and some cultural practices are rubbish.
The chronically unacceptable treatment of women under islam (They’re like “cat meat” according to Australia’s head muslim, so they deserve to be raped/eaten by cats if you leave them out) should be excluded from Australia’s shores pro-actively by all means possible – as the French have finally belatedly realised.

We don’t have a properly secular society yet, and this legislation appears to be injecting renewed – discriminatory and sexist – religiosity into our system of government, which should be completely unacceptable.

Blen_Carmichael12:43 pm 21 Mar 12

“The laws include an option for a female with a head-covering to request that it only be removed in the presence of a female police officer in a private place in accordance with their cultural beliefs and practices.

Not practical. Most dayshift patrol cars are manned by only one officer, and there’s a 50/50 chance it’s a man. Even if it’s a female officer, I doubt she could be bothered going through the palaver of organising a private place for the subject to unveil. Also, what do you do with the three bewildered children in the back who are wondering where the police are taking mum? Chances are that for the routine stops, police will simply accept the ID without insisting on the subject unveiling. Back to square one.

So how does the legislation cover or uncover full facial makeup like a car full of rabid Raider or Brumbies fans or faceflag painted orstaylians on Australia day……or an insane clown posse or I’m in my stage makeup or in street performer mode…..

p1 said :

Oh, and happy Harmony Day everyone!

I hope everyone’s wearing their burquas in harmony with the fundamentalist muslims!

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

This one isn’t.

I think, and I’ve said so in other threads, that the subjugation of women under Islam (or Christianity, for that matter) is an abomination. But I don’t think the law is a remedy. Time is. I can’t see the children and grandchildren of these women being nearly as ready to knuckle under to iron age superstition and misogynistic dictates.

In the meantime, this law seems like a practical compromise.

Oh, and happy Harmony Day everyone!

Fender said :

I was of the perhaps misguided belief that the done thing is to observe and respect the ways of the country you are in. Not change them to suit yourself and you religious beliefs.

I think you will find you have it backwards. In Australia we have laws which require the police (and everyone else) to respect the religious observances of everyone. How is wearing a burqa not observing and respecting that law?

I think you will find that, rather then changing what we do to suit other people, we are simply changing a law we already had, which was designed to protect all our freedoms, so that it better reflects the original intention.

I was of the perhaps misguided belief that the done thing is to observe and respect the ways of the country you are in. Not change them to suit yourself and you religious beliefs. Anybody with two bob’s worth of common sense knows what religion is a crock anyhow.
As the great Angry Anderson once said, “When in Rome, eat spaghetti”

I am so sick of this bull*** – “Muslims, treat women badly, blah blah blah” – Do you think there is not a christian man out there who doesnt, beat, rape and humilliate his wife? there are plenty of Domestically violent people of all relgions, if you knew even a tiny bit of the Islamic faith you would know how wrong and putrid your thoughts are.

(And for those who will assume it, im a jew not a muslim)

People’s Front of Judea?

Can’t be bothered reading the comments , no doubt there will be the usual outrageous comments.

He legislation looks reasonable as appropriate precautions have been included. There’s no logical argument against it.

Burqa’s are so 2005.

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

+100

And underwire bras.

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Similarly, it is also not helpful to assume that just because some Muslim clerics endorse misogynistic practices such as domestic violence and marital rape, that all Muslims do. Extremist fundamentalist Muslims do not represent the majority and their comments often only fuel xenophobic attitudes.

But Western feminists have still been far too politically correct in their approaches. Muslim women may not all be victims but when feminists such as Naomi Wolf argue that the burqa is potentially liberating and empowering (because it supposedly frees women from the male gaze) it just makes a mockery of the process by which a woman’s social identity is systematically erased. If non-Western cultures are designated as “off limits” to unadulterated feminist criticism, then the advances made by Western feminists since the 1970s are intended and reserved for Western (predominantly white) women only.

These issues are clearly complex. But ultimately blaming Muslim women for participating in their own oppression (and the subjugation of women at large) does little to advance the situation. Those women who accept and even condone their own persecution merely illustrate the need for more education and feminist intervention.

Nina Funnell is a researcher in the Journalism and Media Research Centre at the University of NSW.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/feminists-dilemma-how-to-respond-to-muslim-oppression-20110106-19gwe.html#ixzz1pcWz6LlS

Hm, Nina Funnell is clearly a muslim name. So both you and her are experts on muslim religion and culture which clearly gives you every right to patronise the women you claim to defend by telling them what is best for them and forcing them to follow your advice. Makes total sense to me…

fabforty said :

longshanks said :

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

I see your point, but I would like to think that here in Australia something that sets us apart from the “other countries” you’re referring to is the degree of freedom that we all enjoy. This includes the freedom to dress as we choose.

The argument that “In [insert name of conservative Islamic country] western women have to cover their heads, therefore in Australia Muslim women should have to uncover theirs”, is completely illogical, and implies that we should somehow be basing our own social and cultural freedoms on those of other countries.

Having said that, the freedom we enjoy exists alongside, and must respect, the law of the land. Therefore, if there is a law which allows police to enforce the removal of helmets, hats, hoodies, balaclavas, etc. then it is entirely logical, sensible and reasonable to apply that law to head coverings such as scarves and burqas.

For once the government seems to be going about this the right way – although I’m sure there are plenty of people (on both sides of the debate) who will find something to whinge about.

Very well said.

And for those who believe we should “ban the burka” totally and are using women’s rights as thinly veiled (pardon the pun) justification for their own bigotry, I think you should stop and think. Isn’t forcing a woman out of her burka just as bad as forcing her into it ? I don’t support women being forced into wearing burkas, but if they choose to wear one, then let them have that choice.

I believe with time and increased education and rights for Muslim women, burkas will eventually disappear. So back off everyone. Nothing makes you hold onto something more strongly than someone trying to take it from you by force.

Oh yes, we should have educated the South to end slavery rather than do it by force. Eventually they would have come around to our way of thinking.

I despise the whole idea of people being indoctrinated into wearing clothing that imprisons and hinders them. I abhor the implication that “all other men are lusting after my female possession here, so I’d better cover her from head to foot”. Everything about the burqa and its associated fairly tales is simply rotten.

But it’s supposed to be a free country. If people choose to engage in this nonsense, even if for the most rotten of reasons, then they should go for it without hindrance.

And introducing legislation that provides for people to identify themselves to the law when required seems like a reasonable part of the compromises required to live here.

longshanks said :

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

I see your point, but I would like to think that here in Australia something that sets us apart from the “other countries” you’re referring to is the degree of freedom that we all enjoy. This includes the freedom to dress as we choose.

The argument that “In [insert name of conservative Islamic country] western women have to cover their heads, therefore in Australia Muslim women should have to uncover theirs”, is completely illogical, and implies that we should somehow be basing our own social and cultural freedoms on those of other countries.

Having said that, the freedom we enjoy exists alongside, and must respect, the law of the land. Therefore, if there is a law which allows police to enforce the removal of helmets, hats, hoodies, balaclavas, etc. then it is entirely logical, sensible and reasonable to apply that law to head coverings such as scarves and burqas.

For once the government seems to be going about this the right way – although I’m sure there are plenty of people (on both sides of the debate) who will find something to whinge about.

Very well said.

And for those who believe we should “ban the burka” totally and are using women’s rights as thinly veiled (pardon the pun) justification for their own bigotry, I think you should stop and think. Isn’t forcing a woman out of her burka just as bad as forcing her into it ? I don’t support women being forced into wearing burkas, but if they choose to wear one, then let them have that choice.

I believe with time and increased education and rights for Muslim women, burkas will eventually disappear. So back off everyone. Nothing makes you hold onto something more strongly than someone trying to take it from you by force.

I’d like thank Carnita Matthews for this law coming about. She tried to lie and cheat the system by hiding behind a burqa . So fair enough

The fact that the laws are even being considered goes to the attitude of lets change for the minority, not them adapt to us. Current laws are fine choose not to take your covering off get arrested, simple. I personally am sick if this constantly being discussed, this is Australia migrants and the like choose to come here nobody makes them…

TheDancingDjinn said :

I am so sick of this bull*** – “Muslims, treat women badly, blah blah blah” – Do you think there is not a christian man out there who doesnt, beat, rape and humilliate his wife? there are plenty of Domestically violent people of all relgions, if you knew even a tiny bit of the Islamic faith you would know how wrong and putrid your thoughts are.

(And for those who will assume it, im a jew not a muslim)

I think there are many Christian men out there who do not “beat, rape and humilliate his wife”, the majority of them in fact. Oh, and I care not one jot which version of the sky fairy myth people use to justify bad behaviour.

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

I’m not afraid to say those laws in those other countries are oppressive and wrong, and so I see no inconsistency in saying that similar laws to restrict clothing choice would also be oppresive and wrong here.

(The proposed legislation being discussed here sounds completely appropriate, however).

Shinigami_Josh4:41 pm 20 Mar 12

Rollersk8r said :

I can access the link – but is this saying a male police officer has no right to confirm the identity of a female covering her head? How practical is this?

The link is pretty much the same text of the article; as it is only a press release i cant talk as to the final legislation. But it comes across to me that a male officer may ask for a female covering her head to remove it for identification but the woman may choose to refuse based on “cultural beliefs and practices.” at which point the woman would be detained until a female police officer was present to do the identification, most i would think would opt to flash their face at the male officer to not have the hassle of being held up waiting.

TheDancingDjinn4:25 pm 20 Mar 12

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Similarly, it is also not helpful to assume that just because some Muslim clerics endorse misogynistic practices such as domestic violence and marital rape, that all Muslims do. Extremist fundamentalist Muslims do not represent the majority and their comments often only fuel xenophobic attitudes.

But Western feminists have still been far too politically correct in their approaches. Muslim women may not all be victims but when feminists such as Naomi Wolf argue that the burqa is potentially liberating and empowering (because it supposedly frees women from the male gaze) it just makes a mockery of the process by which a woman’s social identity is systematically erased. If non-Western cultures are designated as “off limits” to unadulterated feminist criticism, then the advances made by Western feminists since the 1970s are intended and reserved for Western (predominantly white) women only.

These issues are clearly complex. But ultimately blaming Muslim women for participating in their own oppression (and the subjugation of women at large) does little to advance the situation. Those women who accept and even condone their own persecution merely illustrate the need for more education and feminist intervention.

Nina Funnell is a researcher in the Journalism and Media Research Centre at the University of NSW.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/feminists-dilemma-how-to-respond-to-muslim-oppression-20110106-19gwe.html#ixzz1pcWz6LlS

I am so sick of this bull*** – “Muslims, treat women badly, blah blah blah” – Do you think there is not a christian man out there who doesnt, beat, rape and humilliate his wife? there are plenty of Domestically violent people of all relgions, if you knew even a tiny bit of the Islamic faith you would know how wrong and putrid your thoughts are.

(And for those who will assume it, im a jew not a muslim)

I can access the link – but is this saying a male police officer has no right to confirm the identity of a female covering her head? How practical is this?

SmileOnTrial4:04 pm 20 Mar 12

justin heywood said :

I love how the people who ‘hate’ intolerance and bigotry are the first to jump in and abuse all who disagree with them.

+ 1

Jim Jones said :

Looks like sensible legislation.

I fail to see what ra ra ra muzzies ra ra ra freedom ra ra ra has to do with any of it.

so good

Jim Jones said :

johnboy said :

What’s the weathergirl ever done to deserve that?

Reptoid.

Even reptoids don’t deserve that.

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

Not if they are worn by choice rather than forced on them by a despicable religion that promotes mutilation of little girls genitals.

I’m no fan of the burqa, but not everyone who wears it is forced to.

Regardless, IMHO, banning shit because you don’t like it is the province of the Taliban, not a liberal Western society … except plastic bags – we should ban these solely so Mr G. goes completely apes*** and kidnaps the Channel Nine weather girl or whoever he’s stalking now.

I think we should agree to disagree.

Fair enough.

The legislation actually being proposed is innocuous enough anyway. I don’t think that anyone’s got a problem with it.

colourful sydney racing identity2:43 pm 20 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

Not if they are worn by choice rather than forced on them by a despicable religion that promotes mutilation of little girls genitals.

I’m no fan of the burqa, but not everyone who wears it is forced to.

Regardless, IMHO, banning shit because you don’t like it is the province of the Taliban, not a liberal Western society … except plastic bags – we should ban these solely so Mr G. goes completely apes*** and kidnaps the Channel Nine weather girl or whoever he’s stalking now.

I think we should agree to disagree.

johnboy said :

What’s the weathergirl ever done to deserve that?

Reptoid.

astrojax said :

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

closely followed by eyelash curlers, lipstick and pants without pockets…

And a crackdown on people who don’t order their own meals, instead insisting that ‘I’ll have some of yours’.

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

Not if they are worn by choice rather than forced on them by a despicable religion that promotes mutilation of little girls genitals.

I’m no fan of the burqa, but not everyone who wears it is forced to.

Regardless, IMHO, banning shit because you don’t like it is the province of the Taliban, not a liberal Western society … except plastic bags – we should ban these solely so Mr G. goes completely apes*** and kidnaps the Channel Nine weather girl or whoever he’s stalking now.

What’s the weathergirl ever done to deserve that?

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

Now you’re making about as much sense as Germaine Greer’s v@gina, Jim.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

closely followed by eyelash curlers, lipstick and pants without pockets…

colourful sydney racing identity2:29 pm 20 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

Not if they are worn by choice rather than forced on them by a despicable religion that promotes mutilation of little girls genitals.

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

So a ban on high heel shoes is next?

colourful sydney racing identity2:12 pm 20 Mar 12

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Not this one. I support banning the Burqa and other tools that are used by religious nutters of any flavour to subjugate women.

Jim Jones said :

Ben_Dover said :

Jim Jones said :

Oh I’m so sorry, I had no idea that your religion asked you to wear a Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

Thanks for that Jim, yet again you give a classic example of how the lefties fall flat on their face.

There is no requirement in Islam for women to wear the Burqua.

So, what was your point again?

Wearing the burqa has nothing to do with religion?

Wow, you really do know everything.

Both get 50%. The burqa, and similar coverings, were in use in pre-Islamic cultures in the Middle East. Their use is sanctioned and promoted, but not required, by the Quran. However, their use has been strengthened through various fatwas over time.

It’s not much different to the absorption of pre-Christian cultures as part of the proselytizing and missionary work of the various churches. Easter anyone?

CrocodileGandhi2:04 pm 20 Mar 12

Ben_Dover said :

astrojax said :

wearing their burqa, hijab, etc here is following ‘our’ customs (am assuming you mean ‘real strylyans’ here) as we don’t dictate clothing, so they are doing as we do – wearing what they please.

Try entering a public place wearing a full face crash helmet with a shaded visor. Try walking into a bank with a hoodie up and a scarf around your lower face. Try walking into a petrol station wearing an Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

Then come back and tell me how far your idea that we; “don’t dictate clothing” and we “wear what we please” got you. Ok?

Isn’t this exactly what the legislation is designed to address? I’ve no problem with the proposed legislation. It’s people advocating that such garb be banned from being worn in public that I object to.

You’re still allowed to wear what you like. There are just some minor, and sensible, restrictions on that. This legislation seeks to make such restricitions consistent for all manner of face covering garments.

CrocodileGandhi said :

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

Indeed. We should always simply mimc other countries, regardless of how stupid or opressive their laws are. For instance, homosexuality is punishable by death in Uganda. Why don’t we start doing that? Or why not bring in Iranian blasphemy laws?

Alternatively, using another piece of logic from DUB’s argument, we should implement laws based on the opposite of what occurs in other countries. So many countries, so many laws. Let’s settle for making one law based on the opposite of what occurs in one other country. Based on the examples that CrocodileGandhi put forward:
– In Uganda, homosexuality is punishable by death. Let’s have a law that makes homosexuality compulsory. I call big spoon.
– In Iran, blasphemy is punishable by death. Let’s have a law that makes it compulsory to blaspheme at least once during a sentence. Jesus Frigging Christ, have I told you the story of Mohammed the Merciful and his favourite goat named Rama?

Basing laws on what other countries do or don’t do is about as daft as thinking that the guy who painted your house number really does need to change a $100 note for another customer down the street.

Jim Jones said :

Oh I’m so sorry, I had no idea that your religion asked you to wear a Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

Puck attracts adherents…

And I’m just off to heat up some popcorn.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back1:52 pm 20 Mar 12

justin heywood said :

I love how the people who ‘hate’ intolerance and bigotry are the first to jump in and abuse all who disagree with them.

Something I have observed here (and elsewhere) before…

justin heywood said :

I love how the people who ‘hate’ intolerance and bigotry are the first to jump in and abuse all who disagree with them.

Are you talking about the dude who supports making homosexuality is punishable by death, or the one who thinks that muslims aren’t like us and should be forced to dress like ‘us’?

DUB said :

astrojax said :

wow, predictable xenophobic comment from the off! well done, dub.

wearing their burqa, hijab, etc here is following ‘our’ customs (am assuming you mean ‘real strylyans’ here) as we don’t dictate clothing, so they are doing as we do – wearing what they please.

what justification, i wonder, do you have for your sttaement that they “should be illegal”? i’d love to hear it…

My justification is public safety, number one- I don’t walk around in balaclava, do I?
Oh, and they are exploited by their mean husbands by being forced to wear this, especially during summer. ;P

i don’t know, do you? should i actually care if you did? if you do, are yuou compelled to by your particular cultural mores?

and i suggest a little more research, my friend, on the “mean” [shall let this through to the ‘keeper for now] husbands’ ‘exploitation’.

so let’s see; not a compelling argument, i award the debate to the opposition. well done. carry on.

Ben_Dover said :

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Dude – you should talk to a Muslim, maybe even a Muslim woman. You might be disabused of a whole lot of ‘ideas’ that you hold about this stuff.

justin heywood1:45 pm 20 Mar 12

I love how the people who ‘hate’ intolerance and bigotry are the first to jump in and abuse all who disagree with them.

If burka is acceptable then why not stockings too?

Ben_Dover said :

Jim Jones said :

Oh I’m so sorry, I had no idea that your religion asked you to wear a Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

Thanks for that Jim, yet again you give a classic example of how the lefties fall flat on their face.

There is no requirement in Islam for women to wear the Burqua.

So, what was your point again?

Wearing the burqa has nothing to do with religion?

Wow, you really do know everything.

Ben_Dover said :

Try entering a public place wearing a full face crash helmet with a shaded visor. Try walking into a bank with a hoodie up and a scarf around your lower face. Try walking into a petrol station wearing an Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

While I understand what you are trying, some what inarticulately and long-windedly to say, I wear a full face helmet with tinted visor in public places all the time. No one looks at me funny because the places I wear said headwear are appropriate, ie car parks, the road, gokart tracks, etc. Likewise I wear a hoody, scarf and sunnies in public and none of the other skiers seem fazed.

It is all about context. I suspect we disagree about whether public streets and shops is the correct place to wear religiously mandated clothing. Actually, people feeling the need to wear this stuff irks me a lot, but I think they should be legally able to. What people shouldn’t be able to do is use a religious excuse to avoid a form of identification which is the standard used in this country. Suspicion of committing a crime isn’t really the issue here either, there are plenty of things in this country which require a person to be legally identified without any suspicion of a crime, such as their right to drive, or access a bank account, or enter the woman’s change rooms at a pool.

TL:DR

People who have been brainwashed to believe the magical sky fairy cares about their wardrobe are nuts, just like all the other people in the world.

Jim Jones said :

Oh I’m so sorry, I had no idea that your religion asked you to wear a Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

Thanks for that Jim, yet again you give a classic example of how the lefties fall flat on their face.

There is no requirement in Islam for women to wear the Burqua.

So, what was your point again?

Interesting that the lefties here seem to be supporting the subjugation of women. 🙂

Similarly, it is also not helpful to assume that just because some Muslim clerics endorse misogynistic practices such as domestic violence and marital rape, that all Muslims do. Extremist fundamentalist Muslims do not represent the majority and their comments often only fuel xenophobic attitudes.

But Western feminists have still been far too politically correct in their approaches. Muslim women may not all be victims but when feminists such as Naomi Wolf argue that the burqa is potentially liberating and empowering (because it supposedly frees women from the male gaze) it just makes a mockery of the process by which a woman’s social identity is systematically erased. If non-Western cultures are designated as “off limits” to unadulterated feminist criticism, then the advances made by Western feminists since the 1970s are intended and reserved for Western (predominantly white) women only.

These issues are clearly complex. But ultimately blaming Muslim women for participating in their own oppression (and the subjugation of women at large) does little to advance the situation. Those women who accept and even condone their own persecution merely illustrate the need for more education and feminist intervention.

Nina Funnell is a researcher in the Journalism and Media Research Centre at the University of NSW.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/feminists-dilemma-how-to-respond-to-muslim-oppression-20110106-19gwe.html#ixzz1pcWz6LlS

Ben_Dover said :

astrojax said :

wearing their burqa, hijab, etc here is following ‘our’ customs (am assuming you mean ‘real strylyans’ here) as we don’t dictate clothing, so they are doing as we do – wearing what they please.

Try entering a public place wearing a full face crash helmet with a shaded visor. Try walking into a bank with a hoodie up and a scarf around your lower face. Try walking into a petrol station wearing an Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

Then come back and tell me how far your idea that we; “don’t dictate clothing” and we “wear what we please” got you. Ok?

Oh I’m so sorry, I had no idea that your religion asked you to wear a Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

astrojax said :

wow, predictable xenophobic comment from the off! well done, dub.

wearing their burqa, hijab, etc here is following ‘our’ customs (am assuming you mean ‘real strylyans’ here) as we don’t dictate clothing, so they are doing as we do – wearing what they please.

what justification, i wonder, do you have for your sttaement that they “should be illegal”? i’d love to hear it…

My justification is public safety, number one- I don’t walk around in balaclava, do I?
Oh, and they are exploited by their mean husbands by being forced to wear this, especially during summer. ;P

astrojax said :

wearing their burqa, hijab, etc here is following ‘our’ customs (am assuming you mean ‘real strylyans’ here) as we don’t dictate clothing, so they are doing as we do – wearing what they please.

Try entering a public place wearing a full face crash helmet with a shaded visor. Try walking into a bank with a hoodie up and a scarf around your lower face. Try walking into a petrol station wearing an Jason Voorhees hockey mask.

Then come back and tell me how far your idea that we; “don’t dictate clothing” and we “wear what we please” got you. Ok?

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

wow, predictable xenophobic comment from the off! well done, dub.

wearing their burqa, hijab, etc here is following ‘our’ customs (am assuming you mean ‘real strylyans’ here) as we don’t dictate clothing, so they are doing as we do – wearing what they please.

what justification, i wonder, do you have for your sttaement that they “should be illegal”? i’d love to hear it…

VYBerlinaV8_is_back12:44 pm 20 Mar 12

It seems, on the surface, to be a good compromise. For most of the time, it’s not really necessary to identify people anyway. If police have the required powers to identify people, then I don’t see any harm in allowing people to wear what they want.

Rawhide Kid Part312:32 pm 20 Mar 12

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

That’s why I chose to live here.

colourful sydney racing identity12:08 pm 20 Mar 12

DUB said :

CrocodileGandhi said :

For instance, homosexuality is punishable by death in Uganda. Why don’t we start doing that?

Indeed, I would support that.:D

Ah, I wasn’t sure from your rape jokes on another thread whether you were misguided or something worse, but thanks for confirming you are an ‘a’ grade prick.

DUB said :

CrocodileGandhi said :

For instance, homosexuality is punishable by death in Uganda. Why don’t we start doing that?

Indeed, I would support that.:D

The thing is that we all saw the news, as mentioned, so prevention is better than a cure.As from what I have seen, it is these new “aussies” who always think that they are better than anyone else and demand to be treated like Royals.
P.S. I have seen burqa wearing identities in Canberra.

I’d rather live with muslims and gays than rednecks and bigots.

If the muslims want to wear a covering in public who gives a toss. Let them look like a shaved Cousin it.

CrocodileGandhi said :

For instance, homosexuality is punishable by death in Uganda. Why don’t we start doing that?

Indeed, I would support that.:D

The thing is that we all saw the news, as mentioned, so prevention is better than a cure.As from what I have seen, it is these new “aussies” who always think that they are better than anyone else and demand to be treated like Royals.
P.S. I have seen burqa wearing identities in Canberra.

Sgt.Bungers said :

we find it confronting. We’re used to a person covering their face being a sign that they do not want to be identified and are probably up to something wrong.

As much as I understand what you’re saying, I don’t appreciate you talking on my behalf with the royal ‘we’. I can post to RA too, so there’s no need!

I think the laws are a reasonable compromise between the Sergeant’s concerns and the cultural sensitivities of those who wear the burqa. I lean towards the civil liberties side of this argument, and think that Australians should be allowed to wear whatever they damn well want, but the Sgt Bungerses of this world have me swayed just a little, and I don’t mind the legislation Corbell is proposing.

Oh no! I agree with a member of the Laboral party! Again!

Kill me now!

Yep, this legislation makes sense, although I would rather the request for removal extend to all police officers.

I’m surprise some Australians take offence to an individuals choice to wear the burqa. If someone wants to dress as a post-office box, they should be free to do so. Remember we have our own very famous one in our history: Ned Kelly!

The police and the law weren’t mad keen for Ned Kelly either.

CrocodileGandhi11:31 am 20 Mar 12

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

Indeed. We should always simply mimc other countries, regardless of how stupid or opressive their laws are. For instance, homosexuality is punishable by death in Uganda. Why don’t we start doing that? Or why not bring in Iranian blasphemy laws?

Looks like sensible legislation.

I fail to see what ra ra ra muzzies ra ra ra freedom ra ra ra has to do with any of it.

makes sense to me.

No, they should not be illegal. I like ninjas.

However, for identification purposes, they should be required to be removed if required. We all saw how the whole Carnita Matthews thing turned out.

colourful sydney racing identity10:45 am 20 Mar 12

This should be supported by all in the Assembly.

TheDancingDjinn10:42 am 20 Mar 12

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

They are following our rules – we do’t have a dress code here in Australia, we can wear what we want to wear, Which is what they are doing – they want to wear it becasue it’s part of their own religion. Why is it so difficult to believe that they want to wear it so that they are observing their own religion? Catholics were not allowed to have uncovered heads in church – its just the same, but they have it all the time. – Personally i am yet to see a full faced burqa on a woman here, hijab, and niqjab yes but never the full covering of the face – and why even bother talking about laws regarding it? a cloth of someone you don’t know ooohh it has so much aring on your life – Whoever wanted this to happen should maybe go and find some real problems to fix.

Sgt.Bungers said :

I wonder if this topic will become as controversial as RA’s cyclist vs cars arguements 🙂

It should, will be different, Violet69 and UniStudent can participate and make valuable contributions.

DUB said :

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

I see your point, but I would like to think that here in Australia something that sets us apart from the “other countries” you’re referring to is the degree of freedom that we all enjoy. This includes the freedom to dress as we choose.

The argument that “In [insert name of conservative Islamic country] western women have to cover their heads, therefore in Australia Muslim women should have to uncover theirs”, is completely illogical, and implies that we should somehow be basing our own social and cultural freedoms on those of other countries.

Having said that, the freedom we enjoy exists alongside, and must respect, the law of the land. Therefore, if there is a law which allows police to enforce the removal of helmets, hats, hoodies, balaclavas, etc. then it is entirely logical, sensible and reasonable to apply that law to head coverings such as scarves and burqas.

For once the government seems to be going about this the right way – although I’m sure there are plenty of people (on both sides of the debate) who will find something to whinge about.

I wonder if this topic will become as controversial as RA’s cyclist vs cars arguements 🙂

After the 2005 London bombings, one of the male suspects as able to escape London by wearing a Burka.

As a society who identifies people by face, I personally feel that burkas do not have a place in public places in Australia… we find it confronting. We’re used to a person covering their face being a sign that they do not want to be identified and are probably up to something wrong.

How many people here would recoil at the sight of a couple of blokes walking though civic with balaclavas on?

The burka laws being discussed at minimum should give female police the rights to require a burka wearing person to unveil for identification purposes, if that person is suspected of doing something wrong. Ideally though, any police officer should be perfectly entitled request the removal of a face covering veil if that person is a potential suspect of any crime.

How would society respond to requests of balaclava wearing men to be unveiled only by a certain gendered police officer in a police station? Or a person in a party mask? Or a person in some sort of head to toe costime? In almost every circumstance, it would be considered a joke and a completely unreasonable request.

As a country who’s meant to have a seperation of church and state, why should people covering their faces for religious reasons be treated any differently by our laws?

When Australians go to a predominantly Muslim country, we have to respect their rules and beliefs, no matter how ridiculous, confronting, and unfair we may beleive they are. If we don’t, we can be put do death.

We are perfectly entitled to set rules and precedents surrounding public conduct and dress, and should not be ashamed to do so.

They should be illegal, similar to France.Doubt that burqa will qualify as item required for medical treatment. 🙂
To those opposing- just remember that you have to follow other country’s custom laws when you live or visit there- no short sleeve shirts, shorts, women must cover their heads.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.