-
• #53302
Siri, what is a 'wedge issue'?
-
• #53303
When you're undercrackers get stuck in your arse but you're not wearing a suitably modest covering to remove them in polite company without someone noticing, so just have to put up with it.
-
• #53304
If a constituent came to my MP’s surgery with her face obscured, I should feel fully entitled – like Jack Straw – to ask her to remove it so that I could talk to her properly.
I find this logic a real stretch. I don't think I've ever had a face to face conversation with anyone wearing a veil, but I speak to people on the phone every day and never have trouble understanding them despite never seeing their faces.
-
• #53305
I speak to people on the phone every day and never have trouble understanding them despite never seeing their faces.
They can't see your face, either.
-
• #53306
The only thing 'thoughtful' about Johnson's piece was the thought that went into identifying a way to position himself as the lead Bannonite figure in the UK and assess which racist insults he thought he could get away with i.e. just how loud he could dog-whistle. Spreading race-hate under the guise of 'starting a debate', particularly one that never needed to be started, is a fairly typical level of snidey odium from him.
-
• #53307
They're are maybe 2 parents at my kid's school and a handful of other people I see the rest of the day in burqas up here, obviously it causes no real problem to anyone else's lives but it's a convenient way to say racist stuff while seeming not racist. I think people should be able to wear whatever the fuck they want (I guess they should cover their genitals mostly) and shouldn't be forced to wear anything they don't want to. Boris probably doesn't think this but it's an easy way to say shit things with what looks like sounds reasoning behind it.
-
• #53308
Seems to be a pizza/beer place in Clerkenwell. Every day's a school day.
-
• #53310
I can't speak for his motives but given that France, Germany, Austria, Belgium and Denmark have banned them a debate is inevitable. As much as we dislike Johnson a lot of people don't, so his writing a piece saying a ban is a bad idea isn't necessarily a bad thing. I think the problem is comparing Muslim women to postboxes/bank robbers...
-
• #53311
The burka is the symbol and easy to attack
Yes totally. And as @ToucanVanMoon says it's not exactly top of the priority list is it when you consider how many women actually wear them.
-
• #53312
*Sayeeda Warsi, writing in the Guardian on Wednesday, said the former foreign secretary had used rightwing, “alt-right” language in criticising the appearance of the burqa, which contributes to a view that “Muslim women are fair game”.
“As a feminist, what really disgusts me in this whole episode is that Muslim women are simply political fodder, their lives a convenient battleground on which to stake out a leadership bid,” Lady Warsi wrote.
Boris Johnson’s contempt for Muslim women is part of a dangerous pattern“Well, this approach is not just offensive, it’s dangerous. Johnson’s words have once again validated the view of those that ‘other’ Muslims. They send out a message that Muslim women are fair game.
“What starts as useful targets for ‘colourful political language’ and the odd bit of toxic campaigning ends up in attacks on our streets.”
The peer wrote that she was setting out “precisely why his remarks are indefensible” and said the phrases he used signalled something else.
“He said, not only to those Muslim women who veil, but to many more who associate with a faith in which some women do, that you don’t belong here,” Warsi said.
“I refuse to accept that these phrases were some kind of mistake, and the offence inadvertent – Johnson is too intelligent and too calculating for that. No, this was all quite deliberate. His refusal to apologise supports that.
“He set out a liberal position, but he did it in a very alt-right way. This allowed him to dog-whistle: to say to particular elements of the party that he’s tough on Muslims. Yet again, he’s trying to have his cake and eat it.”
Arguing that anti-Muslim hate crime was often aimed at women wearing the veil, she added: “So, as much as Johnson thinks he’s being his usual clever self, he’s helping to create an environment in which hate crime is more likely.”* -
• #53313
Boris was actually arguing against the ban (new law in Denmark IIRC), but has managed to come out looking like he's attacking burqa wearers.
Some of his comments are actually ok and I would even say I might be inclined to agree with his points, then he trots out lines about post boxes and I'm like "nope, still a massive bell".
-
• #53314
I do not believe in religious privilege so I how can I tolerate the face covering muslim if I am not willing to tolerate the face covering mask wearer?
If someone comes to your constituency surgery in a burqa, they are a constituent with religious beliefs that may have been forced upon them who is likely to have a need of your help.
If someone comes in an Anonymous/Boris mask, they are being a prick.
You see the difference?
-
• #53315
A review of Johnson's book from a few years ago on Churchill (from someone who might be expected to do some good fact checking)
-
• #53316
This seems to be quite an insightful perspective (on Johnson and Bannon)
-
• #53317
A pizza place part owned by some Farage wannabe in clerkenwall
-
• #53318
Wasn't the supposed point of the hoodie ban the fact that the shopping centres saw a lot of antisocial behaviour from people wearing hoodies?
-
• #53319
It is not racist to challenge religion (I would encourage everyone to do so).
Do you encourage them, in the process, to use childishly insulting wording designed to appeal to racists? Your choice of username and icon suggests you might.
The choice of imagery is important in communication, whether it's comparing a woman to a letter box or choosing the name and image of elite WWII German troops as your representation.
-
• #53320
PM read out most of it to give it context. So yes. My issue is with the intention.
To start the very discussion is unnecessary. It's reviving an issue which was discussed at length when various other countries where banning it. It's use is not that wide speed either.
Every element of the article is calculated to strike a chord with a different audience.
What if the tl;Dr of the article was; "I don't think being a gay man is right or normal but I still think they should have equal rights"?
-
• #53321
Surprisingly little outcry over today's Saudi crucifixion. Because state-sponsored beheading just isn't enough- horrific.
I'm obviously not defending the fella's crimes, which were also horrific.
-
• #53322
Don't know where to put this very strange saga of an article from Cycling Tips on a cyclist that went over to the dark side:
-
• #53323
I read this book a couple years back, written by a French feminist, on the issue of the burqa and islamaphobia. I highly recommend it.
https://www.versobooks.com/books/1929-separate-and-dominate
I myself am no fan of religion and nor do I believe anyone has the right to opress women by forcing them to wear something they don't want to. But I'm always confused that people don't see that banning the burqa and removing a woman's right to wear something, something she chooses to wear, is also a form of oppression.
So many reasonable people seem to have fallen for the narrative that all Muslim women are controlled by the men in their lives. Which is probably understandable after what, nearly two decades of the media and politicians villifying Islam.
TL;DR Boris Johnson and his team know exactly what they're doing with that article and he'll probably be ruling this hateful little island soon enough.
-
• #53324
I myself am no fan of religion and nor do I believe anyone has the right to opress women by forcing them to wear something they don't want to. But I'm always confused that people don't see that banning the burqa and removing a woman's right to wear something, something she chooses to wear, is also a form of oppression.
This.
-
• #53325
Yeah. Classmates in Germany were mostly muslim, of the females free from family oversight etc. all the Iranians immediately ditched their head dress/robes upon arrival, but the Egyptians didn't and showed no desire to either.
I don't really give a flaming fuck what people decide to wear as long as they afford others the same tolerance.
(unless it's male g strings on the beach. I don't need to see your hairy gary)
" also believe that the burka is oppressive and ridiculous and more importantly a garment whose very design was created to subjugate women: burkas were created to hide women from the eyes of men lest they dishonour themselves."
Totally.
But what is he going to do about faith schools or women (it is always women) being attacked for wearing niqabs/burqas? It is actually WOMEN again that get attacked by the "defenders of British culture" not the men.
The burka is the symbol and easy to attack, but so far the Tories have done nothing for social cohesion to the extent that one of their own lords a few years back said policies have failed.
A English friend of mine said that in her home town a lot of women are now covered up and some wear the burka. If those women would want to "escape" I can bet they are going to be discriminated against by the majority. He is really not helping I think by turning is into a simple issue.