French senate passes face-veil ban

[mosfeld]

French senate passes face-veil ban
Upper house approves bill outlawing wearing of garment in public places, amid concerns move may heighten Islamophobia.

http://english.aljazeera.net/mritems/Images/2010/9/14/2010914192022910734_20.jpg

The French senate has voted in favour of a bill to ban face-covering veils in public, a proposal that has sparked fierce debate in a country that is home to Western Europe's largest Muslim population.

Senators approved the measure by 246 votes to one, with most opposition senators abstaining in protest.

The law has already been passed by the national assembly but still has to be vetted by the constitutional council, France's highest legal body.

Critics of the proposed law hope that the council will overturn the bill.

Some rights groups have voiced concerns that the legislation risks raising Islamophobia, in a country where some Muslim women already face harrassment for wearing the veil.

If implemented, women caught wearing face veils in public places, including streets, markets, government buildings, private businesses and public transport would be fined $190.

Tougher penalties

Men who force their wives or daughters to cover for religious reasons would face tougher penalties of up to $38,685 and a one-year jail term.

Supporters of the bill insist it is aimed at integration, rather than stigmatising a minority group.

Only around 2,000 women in France wear a face-covering veil, out of a Muslim community of around five million.

Speaking before Tuesday's vote, Michele Alliot-Marie, the justice minister, said: "The full face veil dissolves the identity of a person in that of a community.

"It challenges the French model of integration based on the acceptance of the values of our society."

Alliot-Marie said the ban had nothing to do with religion and said it reaffirmed the French values of equality and dignity of all individuals and would prevent women from simply becoming faceless members of a larger ethnic community.

Legal minefield

Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, has promoted the bill as a measure to protect Muslim women from being forced to wear the all-enshrouding veil, which he has described as "not welcome".

But some Muslim women argue that such a law would force them to stay at home so as to avoid showing their faces in public.

"I won't go out. I'll send people to shop for me. I'll stay home, very simply," Oum Al Khyr, a 45-year-old woman who lives on the outskirts of Paris, told the AP news agency.

"I'll spend my time praying, I'll exclude myself from society when I wanted to live in it," she said.

The bill to ban the veil will take effect only after a six-month period set aside for mediation and explanation.

The legislation was carefully worded to ensure it passes potential legal minefields.

The measure is called "Forbidding the Dissimulation of the Face in the Public Space", making no mention of "woman", "veil" or "Islam".

The language was tweaked in similar fashion when a ban on headscarves was passed in 2004, with the law outlawing all "ostentatious" religious symbols, including large Christian crosses.

http://english.aljazeera.net//news/europe/2010/09/2010914184958118128.html

[Rakhmetov]

Good, this will preserve French identity against misogynistic Islamic fascism. The only problem now is to overthrow the French bourgeoisie and replace it with a workers' state.

[Nolan]

Good, this will preserve French identity against misogynistic Islamic fascism. The only problem now is to overthrow the French bourgeoisie and replace it with a workers' state.

For the fifteenth fucking time, there is no such thing as "Islamic Fascism" as a real movement. This will do nothing but hurt the Muslim population of France.

[LeninBalls]

The only problem now is to overthrow the French bourgeoisie and replace it with a workers' state.

Why hasn't anyone told me this is the solution!?

[graymouser]

Good, this will preserve French identity against misogynistic Islamic fascism. The only problem now is to overthrow the French bourgeoisie and replace it with a workers' state.
What can be more reactionary than "identity" with an imperialist state (which France remains)? Workers in France should not identify with France but with the international working class - and we'll never get the bourgeoisie overthrown until they do.

"Islamic fascism" cannot be a serious sociological description of the Muslim inhabitants of Europe, who are in no way linked to what fascism actually means (i.e.: a reactionary movement of the crazed petty-bourgeoisie combined with an army drawn from the lumpenproletariat, organized against the workers' movement for the preservation of capital). In Europe, despite the misogyny of traditional interpretations of Islam, Muslims are an oppressed minority and revolutionaries should be on their side against this frontal attack. This law reeks of bigotry wrapped falsely in the garb of women's rights, and is a continuation of the French government's ongoing racist campaign. Get it right.

[Crimson Commissar]

Good, this will preserve French identity against misogynistic Islamic fascism. The only problem now is to overthrow the French bourgeoisie and replace it with a workers' state.
Agreed. The issue of Islam in France doesn't seem to be one based on racism as it is in Britain or the US. This ban is perfectly acceptable and there's no reason to claim it is "islamophobic". Opposing this would be reactionary and anti-progressive, and will only further prolong the existence of such ridiculous ideas that religion has brought into our society.

[Rakhmetov]

For the fifteenth fucking time, there is no such thing as "Islamic Fascism" as a real movement. This will do nothing but hurt the Muslim population of France.


So you support Islamists who demand women be fettered to this burqa bullshit? I really question your radical bona fides if you subscribe to oppressing women to this ancient vestige of tribal feudalism!

[Rakhmetov]

What can be more reactionary than "identity" with an imperialist state (which France remains)? Workers in France should not identify with France but with the international working class - and we'll never get the bourgeoisie overthrown until they do.

"Islamic fascism" cannot be a serious sociological description of the Muslim inhabitants of Europe, who are in no way linked to what fascism actually means (i.e.: a reactionary movement of the crazed petty-bourgeoisie combined with an army drawn from the lumpenproletariat, organized against the workers' movement for the preservation of capital). In Europe, despite the misogyny of traditional interpretations of Islam, Muslims are an oppressed minority and revolutionaries should be on their side against this frontal attack. This law reeks of bigotry wrapped falsely in the garb of women's rights, and is a continuation of the French government's ongoing racist campaign. Get it right.

The French workers (men and women) need to defend their working class culture against this frontal assault on all the progressive gains their class has won after many decades of struggle. Draped from head to foot like ghosts, women will be denied their humanity and all rights they have fought for. Only a drug-addled numbskull or a theocrat will want to fight for the rights of Islamists to treat women with such scorn.








http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=burqa&aq=f&aqi=g4g-o1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=ab5cdb1806fef4aa

[danyboy27]

i am an atheist, and i think this is stupid and xenophobic.

such restriction is a dirrect attack to individual freedom and its fucking disgusting.

they should spend more time creating program to help people who are indoctrinated or stuck in a cult instead of this bullshit.

The real issue is not the people who willingly for their religion wear ridiculous clothing, its the people who are forced and opressed, that the people who need help.

and all this talk about france ''identity'' is nationalist bullshit, a country identity is defined by the wide range of people living in it, nobody own the ''identity'' of France, neither the algerian or the ''pure'' french can claim to ''own'' the ''identity'' of the country.

those butthurt nationalists make me fucking sick.

[durhamleft]

So you support Islamists who demand women be fettered to this burqa bullshit? I really question your radical bona fides if you subscribe to oppressing women to this ancient vestige of tribal feudalism!

If banning the veil actually would help the situation, it would require a proper debate, but in essence all this ban will mean is that women who left the houses will now be unable to, as I can guarantee their husbands will 'convince' them not to. Thus leading to the women being oppressed even more.

[danyboy27]

The French workers (men and women) need to defend their working class culture against this frontal assault on all the progressive gains their class has won after many decades of struggle. Draped from head to foot like ghosts, women will be denied their humanity and all rights they have fought for. Only a drug-addled numbskull or a theocrat will want to fight for the rights of Islamists to treat women with such scorn.

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=burqa&aq=f&aqi=g4g-o1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=ab5cdb1806fef4aa

haa crap another supremacist.

listen bro, you cant fight culture, culture happen, and has long there are laws established that allow freedom for both the majority and the minority, there is no real threat.

[Crimson Commissar]

If banning the veil actually would help the situation, it would require a proper debate, but in essence all this ban will mean is that women who left the houses will now be unable to, as I can guarantee their husbands will 'convince' them not to. Thus leading to the women being oppressed even more.
If their husbands are that fucking sick and controlling that they would do that, then I think we have a far bigger problem than a few muslims being upset because they can't wear a damn veil anymore.

[Rakhmetov]

haa crap another supremacist.

listen bro, you cant fight culture, culture happen, and has long there are laws established that allow freedom for both the majority and the minority, there is no real threat.


I see you're a troll.

[RadioRaheem84]

Can't people see that this is one form of totality totally enforcing itself upon another group? We're dealing with extreme liberal pretensions against what is perceived to be an Islamic threat. This is a direct result of the stupid clash of civilizations mantra and an Orientalist view of the East.

I do not support the veil but I also do not support liberal democratic hegemony over other people's lives. This is not the way to progress.

The militant anti-theism especially from Europe is extremely annoying.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The militant anti-theism especially from Europe is extremely annoying.

It's especially jarring when one considers that Europe still gives the Pope the time of day.

[Crimson Commissar]

The militant anti-theism especially from Europe is extremely annoying.
And the islamophilia of the left is even more annoying to us.

[RadioRaheem84]

It's especially jarring when one considers that Europe still gives the Pope the time of day.

Well I meant from the specific group of anti-theists especially from Europe. Euston Manifesto types that support such policies.

I was more critiquing the elements that defend such policies as banning the veil as a notch on the belt of Western civ.

[RadioRaheem84]

And the islamophilia of the left is even more annoying to us.

It's not islamophilia, it's a defense of people who are obviously being subjected to a form of cultural hegemony and western chauvinism.

You're not cool for hating on Islam, CC. I hate it just as much you do, but I don't think it's hip to see it as a threat to social progress over capitalism itself.

Is it the sort of ballsy arrogance that you like about new atheism, anti-theism of the likes of Hitchens and Harris?

[Crimson Commissar]

It's not islamophilia, it's a defense of people who are obviously being subjected to a form of cultural hegemony and western chauvinism.

You're not cool for hating on Islam, CC. I hate it just as much you do, but I don't think it's hip to see it as a threat to social progress over capitalism itself.

Is it the sort of ballsy arrogance that you like about new atheism, anti-theism of the likes of Hitchens and Harris?
I don't hate on religion to look cool. I hate it because I see it as being ignorant, intolerant and for the fact that it promotes obviously reactionary ideas that go against my leftist beliefs. I don't see it as being more of a threat than capitalism. Both religion and capitalism are a threat to social progress, and so I will oppose them. It's kind of ignorant to deny that religion is a threat to us. I don't condone the oppression of religious groups. I believe that the only way religion can truly be wiped out is if people willingly choose to become atheists. You can't force someone out of religion. But a ban on veils isn't going to harm anyone other than a few stubborn idiots who are so obsessed with their "faith" that they have to go batshit insane when they're told to take it off.

[graymouser]

The French workers (men and women) need to defend their working class culture against this frontal assault on all the progressive gains their class has won after many decades of struggle. Draped from head to foot like ghosts, women will be denied their humanity and all rights they have fought for. Only a drug-addled numbskull or a theocrat will want to fight for the rights of Islamists to treat women with such scorn.
The law against face-veiling comes in a very specific context, and that is the broad racist offensive going on against Muslims and Roma in Europe. This doesn't give the people who force women to wear veils or burqas a pass, but it does need to be opposed, full stop, as an assault on freedom of religion. Women should be allowed to wear veils if they choose to do so, but they should not be forced to do so. These two facts do not contradict one another, and a sincere revolutionary must support both sides of the right.

As for the "working class culture" of France, well, the bourgeois government has no right to say one way or another what the culture of French workers ought to be.

[HEAD ICE]

Good, this will preserve French identity against misogynistic Islamic fascism. The only problem now is to overthrow the French bourgeoisie and replace it with a workers' state.

PKedrQpH5fg

[RadioRaheem84]

I don't hate on religion to look cool. I hate it because I see it as being ignorant, intolerant and for the fact that it promotes obviously reactionary ideas that go against my leftist beliefs. I don't see it as being more of a threat than capitalism. Both religion and capitalism are a threat to social progress, and so I will oppose them. It's kind of ignorant to deny that religion is a threat to us. I don't condone the oppression of religious groups. I believe that the only way religion can truly be wiped out is if people willingly choose to become atheists. You can't force someone out of religion. But a ban on veils isn't going to harm anyone other than a few stubborn idiots who are so obsessed with their "faith" that they have to go batshit insane when they're told to take it off.


But isn't the new atheist/anti-theist argument usually pro-liberal in the sense that they support any gradual secular liberalism while almost totally avoiding material conditions/capitalism? Doesn't this argument fall flat when in the last twenty years, the population in liberal democratic countries have become increasingly religious? Especially due to economic conditions and the marginalizing of secular leftist forces?

[Crimson Commissar]

But isn't the new atheist/anti-theist argument usually pro-liberal in the sense that they support any gradual secular liberalism while almost totally avoiding material conditions/capitalism? Doesn't this argument fall flat when in the last twenty years, the population in liberal democratic countries have become increasingly religious? Especially due to economic conditions and the marginalizing of secular leftist forces?
Uhm, militant atheism doesn't really have any real political affliation. Yes, many atheists tend to be quite liberal, but this doesn't mean that communists cannot be militant atheists.

[graymouser]

But a ban on veils isn't going to harm anyone other than a few stubborn idiots who are so obsessed with their "faith" that they have to go batshit insane when they're told to take it off.
The ban is reactionary and racist, and tied into a racist offensive. By supporting it you are supporting racism that is waving the banner of the Enlightenment.

We have to oppose racism even when it happens to tie in with some of our beliefs - otherwise we aren't worth much as anti-racists. The truth is, when the French ban veils they are turning the supposed ideals they are standing up for into trash by making them nothing more than tools for bigotry. We can't let women's rights be the club that the French bourgeois government uses to beat in the heads of Muslims, no matter what our own opinion on the veil or Islam might happen to be. We have to demand total freedom of religious expression, and support women's rights unequivocally - and reject the false claim of the self-righteous French government to be the protector of those rights.

[RadioRaheem84]

Uhm, militant atheism doesn't really have any real political affliation. Yes, many atheists tend to be quite liberal, but this doesn't mean that communists cannot be militant atheists.

But how can one escape the political connotations?

There are plenty of great atheist Marxists that do not succumb to militant new atheism of the current brand hocked by Hitchens and Harris.

[graymouser]

Uhm, militant atheism doesn't really have any real political affliation. Yes, many atheists tend to be quite liberal, but this doesn't mean that communists cannot be militant atheists.
Militant atheism doesn't exist outside of a context. What does it do to advance the living class struggle? If you can't answer that you should not be pushing it as something communists should be involved with. In this case it's clear that militant atheism doesn't advance progressive politics but winds up in a bloc with the reactionaries. In other places it may be different, but with the veil case we can see clearly its limitations.

[Rakhmetov]

I can't believe I'm having this argument with "leftists" who support the burqa-esque oppression of women!

If we do not draw the line with the burqa then the Islamo-fascists will introduce into Western Europe clitoridectomy and fibulation and other misogynistic practices. An estimated 100 million young girls are subjected to these "cultural practices" in Africa and the Middle-East. Those Islamo-fascists who say "respect our culture" are just seeking license to commit crimes against the more vulnerable members of their society. What's next?--- respecting stoning to death for adultery in France?



P.S. the moderator who subtracted 5 points from my rep for the comments I've posted in this thread is only aiding and abetting the backward culture of Islamo-fascism and misogynism.

I recommend everyone to read Dr. Parenti's The Culture Struggle, including the chapters entitled "The Custom Against Women", "The Global Rape Culture," & "The Hazard of Cultural Relativism."


(The following is a revised excerpt from Parenti's newest book, THE CULTURE STRUGGLE)
If we uncritically immerse ourselves in the cultural context of any society, seeing it only as it sees itself, then we are embracing the self-serving illusions it has of itself. Perceiving a society "purely on its own terms" usually means seeing it through the eyes of dominant groups that exercise a preponderant influence in shaping its beliefs and practices. Furthermore, the dominant culture frequently rests on standards that are not shared by everyone within the society itself. So we come upon a key question: whose culture is it anyway? Too often what passes for the established culture of a society is the exclusive preserve of the privileged, a weapon used against more vulnerable elements.
This is seen no more clearly than in the wrongdoing perpetrated against women. A United Nations report found that prejudice and violence against women "remain firmly rooted in cultures around the world."
In many countries, including the United States, women endure discrimination in wages, occupational training, and job promotion. According to a New York Times report (6/18/04), in sub-Saharan Africa women cannot inherit or own land-even though they cultivate it and grow 80 percent of the continent's food.
It is no secret that women are still denied control over their own reproductive activity. Throughout the world about eighty million pregnancies a year are thought to be unwanted or ill-timed. And some twenty million unsafe illegal abortions are performed annually, resulting in the deaths of some 78,000 women yearly, with millions more sustaining serious injury.
In China and other Asian countries where daughters are seen as a liability, millions of infant females are missing, having been aborted or killed at birth or done in by neglect and underfeeding.
An estimated hundred million girls in Africa and the Middle East have been genitally mutilated by clitoridectomy (excision of the clitoris) or infibulation (excision of the clitoris, labia minor, and inner walls of the labia majora, with the vulva sewed almost completely shut, allowing an opening about the circumference of a pencil).
The purpose of such mutilation is to drastically diminish a woman's capacity for sexual pleasure, insuring that she remains her husband's compliant possession. Some girls perish in the excision process (usually performed by an older female with no medical training). Long term consequences of infibulation include obstructed menstrual flow, chronic infection, hurtful coitus, and complicated childbirth.
In much of the Middle East, women have no right to drive cars or appear in public unaccompanied by a male relative. They have no right to initiate divorce proceedings but can be divorced at the husband's will.
In Latin American and Islamic countries, men sometimes go unpunished for defending their "honor" by killing their allegedly unfaithful wives or girlfriends. In fundamentalist Islamic Iran, the law explicitly allows for the execution of adulterous women by stoning, burning, or being thrown off a cliff.
In countries such as Bangladesh and India, women are murdered so that husbands can remarry for a better dowry. An average of five women a day are burned in dowry-related disputes in India, and many more cases go unreported. In Bihar, India, women found guilty of witchcraft are still burned to death. In modern-day Ghana, there exist prison camps for females accused of being witches. In contrast, male fetish priests in Ghana have free reign with their magic practices. These priests often procure young girls from poor families that are said to owe an ancestral debt to the priest's forebears. The girls serve as the priests' sex slaves. The ones who manage to escape are not taken back by their fearful families. To survive, they must either return to the priest shrine or go to town and become prostitutes.
Millions of young females drawn from all parts of the world are pressed into sexual slavery, in what amounts to an estimated $7 billion annual business. More than a million girls and boys, many as young as five and six, are conscripted into prostitution in Asia, and perhaps an equal number in the rest of the world.
Pedophiles from the United States and other countries fuel the Asian traffic. Enjoying anonymity and impunity abroad, these "sex tourists" are inclined to treat their acts of child rape as legal and culturally acceptable. In Afghanistan under the Taliban, women were captives in their own homes, prohibited from seeking medical attention, working, or going to school. The U.S. occupation of Afghanistan was hailed by President Bush Jr. as a liberation of Afghani women.
In fact, most of that country remains under the control of warlords who oppose any move toward female emancipation. And the plight of rural women has become yet more desperate. Scores of young women have attempted self-immolation to escape family abuse and unwanted marriages. "During the Taliban we were living in a graveyard, but we were secure," opined one female activist. "Now women are easy marks for rapists and armed marauders." In Iraq we find a similar pattern: the plight of women worsening because of a U.S. invasion. Saddam Hussein's secular Baath Party created a despotic regime (fully backed by Washington during its most murderous period). But the Baathists did allow Iraqi women rights that were unparalleled in the Gulf region. Women could attend university, travel unaccompanied, and work alongside men in various professions. They could choose whom to marry or refrain from getting married.
But with the growing insurgency against the U.S. occupation, females are now targeted by the ascendant Islamic extremists. Clerics have imposed new restrictions on them. Women are forced to wear the traditional head covering, and girls spend most of their days indoors confined to domestic chores.
Most Iraqi women are now deprived of public education. Often the only thing left to read is the Koran. Many women fear they will never regain the freedom they enjoyed under the previous regime. As one Iraqi feminist noted, "The condition of women has been deteriorating. . . . This current situation, this fundamentalism, is not even traditional. It is desperate and reactionary." For all the dramatic advances made by women in the United States, they too endure daunting victimization. Tens of thousands of them either turn to prostitution because of economic need or are forced into it by a male exploiter--and kept there by acts of violence and intimidation.
An estimated three out of four women in the USA are victims of a violent crime sometime during their lifetime. Every day, four women are murdered by men to whom they have been close. Murder is the second leading cause of death among young American women.
In the USA domestic violence is the leading cause of injury among females of reproductive age. An estimated three million women are battered each year by their husbands or male partners, often repeatedly.
Statistically, a woman's home is her most dangerous place--if she has a man in it.
Battered women usually lack the financial means to escape, especially if they have children. When they try, their male assailants are likely to come after them and inflict still worse retribution. Police usually are of little help. Arrest is the least frequent response to domestic violence. In most states, domestic beatings are classified as a misdemeanor.
Women who kill their longtime male abusers in desperate acts of self-defense usually end up serving lengthy prison sentences. In recent times, women's organizations have had some success in providing havens for battered women and pressuring public authorities to move against male violence.
To conclude, those who demand respect for their culture may have a legitimate claim or they may really be seeking license to oppress the more vulnerable elements within their society.
There may be practices in any culture, including our own, that are not worthy of respect. And there are basic rights that transcend all cultures, as even governments acknowledge when they outlaw certain horrific customs and sign international accords in support of human rights. ______________
Michael Parenti's recent books include Superpatriotism (City Lights), The Assassination of Julius Caesar (New Press), and most recently, The Culture Struggle (Seven Stories Press). For more information visit: www.michaelparenti.org.

[lyng]

Obviously it's the ruling class using xenophobia to divide people.


Anyway, how can anyone accept that the state should decide what you wear?

[Rakhmetov]

Obviously it's the ruling class using xenophobia to divide people.


Anyway, how can anyone accept that the state should decide what you wear?

Oh, that is a lot of cant. It's not about style or fashion, it's about oppression.

[RadioRaheem84]

Mengistu, I highly doubt Parenti supports the French policy.

[graymouser]

If we do not draw the line with the burqa then the Islamo-fascists will introduce into Western Europe clitoridectomy and fibulation and other misogynistic practices. An estimated 100 million young girls are subjected to these "cultural practices" in Africa and the Middle-East. Those Islamo-fascists who say "respect our culture" are just seeking license to commit crimes against the more vulnerable members of their society. What's next?--- respecting stoning to death for adultery in France?
This has crossed the line from "militant" anti-theism to outright xenophobia and racism. "Islamo-fascist" is a smear word that was used to whip up support for the imperial wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which combined have killed hundreds of thousands if not millions. The insinuation that most Muslims want to introduce clitoridectomy or "fibulation" (I am honestly not sure what you mean by that word) is an outright lie. Whatever you may say about it don't sully the name of communism, or leftism with this reactionary nonsense.

[danyboy27]

I see you're a troll.

i am not a troll, but you are a supremacist for sure.

FYI, there is no ak-47 armed militia in France going house to house to force women to wear the veil or forcing people to pray 5 time a day or....etc etc etc.

there is, indeed some women who are badly treated by their husbands beccause of their religious belief, but a ban on veil wont fix that, social and help program will.

Ban veil or religion in general are only good to satisfy the capricious taste of butthurt natinalists and bigot who hate foreigner and colored peoples.


i dont fucking care about other people religion, has long nobody harass me to join their cult or force me to live in a society rulled by religious laws, what other people wear, praise or fuck is none of my concern.

[Conscript]

A ban on burqas is not fighting 'oppressive islam', it's doing nothing more then alienating a minority and satisfying xenophobes. Believe it or not, some muslim women prefer the burqa because it fulfills the role it was created for, sexual liberation in the form of fighting the objectification of women. As for the women that are forced to wear it, this is an entirely different issue, and does not help their plight in the least, the same way banning alcohol didn't help the wives of drunkards.

I'm not entirely convinced that islam is as much of a threat as stated in this thread. I'd sooner believe that islam is being used as a scapegoat.

[brigadista]

in the context of the Roma deportations this week this is sinisterand banning a mode of dress will achieve nothing - the communities this will affect are marginalised and suffer racism on a daily basis -the stupidity of the French government is breathtaking lately

[manic expression]

I can't believe I'm having this argument with "leftists" who support the burqa-esque oppression of women!
I don't think you're seeing the bigger picture. It would be one thing for a working-class government, with full representation and participation from the workers affected (aka workers from that background), to say "OK, we're doing away with the veil because it's male chauvinism and it dehumanizes our sisters." But that's not what France is saying. The French state, which went out of its way to get Muslims into the country for cheap labor, is now saying "well, we're not going to help any of you fuckers find jobs, and we're going to make you outcasts in a society you've lived in your entire lives...but we are going to tell you what you can and can't wear!" Does that sound like anything progressive to you?

This is not about women's liberation, it is about the French state enforcing its will upon the Muslim working class. The personal effects of a Muslim woman is something to be abolished, but the abject impoverishment of the entire Muslim community in France? Well, that's just good business.

You CANNOT separate this one policy from the rest of French racism...especially in a political climate where Roma and Sinti are now subject to ethnic cleansing. Trying to look at this in isolation misses the whole nature of the thing.

A truly progressive treatment of this issue would first recognize the rights of the Muslim workers in France as a community (or various communities). Only in genuine working-class solidarity and partnership can we make constructive change...capitalists lecturing exploited workers from upon high about what is and isn't enlightened has nothing to do with that.


If we do not draw the line with the burqa then the Islamo-fascists will introduce into Western Europe clitoridectomy and fibulation and other misogynistic practices. An estimated 100 million young girls are subjected to these "cultural practices" in Africa and the Middle-East. Those Islamo-fascists who say "respect our culture" are just seeking license to commit crimes against the more vulnerable members of their society. What's next?--- respecting stoning to death for adultery in France?
That's a textbook fallacy. "Burqu-esque" clothing does not equal clitoridectomy or fibulation. Just because you're paranoid to say that face veils will lead to female mutilation doesn't mean it's true. Let's just remember that next time, OK, Pim?

Because if not, then we might as well say this: "well, if we don't draw the line with the mosque, then the Islamo-fascists will introduce cutting the hands off of pickpockets!" After all, that's what happens in Saudi Arabia, and the Saudis fund plenty of mosques built in Europe, so who's to say that we won't be slicing off limbs for petty theft? That's why your logic here is downright crazy.


P.S. the moderator who subtracted 5 points from my rep for the comments I've posted in this thread is only aiding and abetting the backward culture of Islamo-fascism and misogynism.
:rolleyes:

[KC]

The defense of this law by supposed leftists is ridiculous. It's comparable to claiming that women wearing dresses is sexist and therefore supporting state legislation banning the wearing of dresses by women. The existence of gender identity and gender roles is not in and of itself sexist. This also applies to their cultural manifestations.

In effect this is not only supportive of bourgeois state intervention into civil society, but also is a concession that it is the job of the bourgeois state to enforce cultural norms. This policy is incredibly dangerous, for obvious reasons.

Further, to support such an act when there is such a sharpening of tensions between many middle class westerners who are ignorant of Islam and believe in the "Islamofascist" outlook is to condone and implicitly support anti-Muslim bigotry.

It also alienates all Muslims. Yes, all of them. Good job!

[Crimson Commissar]

The defense of this law by supposed leftists is ridiculous. It's comparable to claiming that women wearing dresses is sexist and therefore supporting state legislation banning the wearing of dresses by women. The existence of gender identity and gender roles is not in and of itself sexist. This also applies to their cultural manifestations.
Uhm, there's a BIG difference between wearing a dress and wearing a fully black cloak over your entire fucking body. And no, religion does not equal culture. We're not attacking the culture of middle-easterners, we're attacking the religion of Islam. If some muslims have become so deeply involved with their insane cult that they have no culture other than islamic culture, then fine. Not our fault that that's all they identify with.

[KC]

Religion and culture are bound up in one another to the point where they are essentially inseparable. Your "attack on Islam" is an attack on culture as a result. There is a reason militant atheism is not only misguided but ultimately gets you nowhere. As Marx noted in his critique of Feuerbach, atheism itself can be just as cultish as theism.

In short your attitude towards religion is deeply flawed which has led you to side with the bourgeois state as an enforcer of cultural norms.

[Lyev]

Golly, people are defending this ban? Did you not read in the title the phrase "French senate" - the French ruling class? So people honestly think the Sarkozy et al banned wearing the veil in public because they sincerely care about feminism and sexist oppression? This is a government that just kicked out from it's country thousands of Roma gypsies. This is nothing to do with fighting sexism; I would imagine this is something to with perpetuating bourgeois interests, as some users have already said. This will feed the flames of resentment, fear etc., in short, such bans disconnect the Muslim community from mainstream society. I think the ban is disgusting. Why not a ban on people wearing the cross, or wearing yarmulkas in public? Again, it's nothing to do with "Islamo-fascism" and "oppression of women". You're effectively siding with the ruling class of France when you support this ban. Summed up, I am against sexism in all it's forms, but I am also against judging (and discriminating against) someone based wholly on their religion. I wonder (and I could sound ridiculous if you actually have) Mengistu, have you ever even read the Qur'an? I mean, come on, let's put this context, especially since it was the anniversary of 9/11 a few days ago. It's Islamophobia, xenophobia and bigotry we need to be fighting and condemning: not this vague bourgeois notion of "Islamo-fascism". I suppose next we'll be hearing the invasion of Iraq was justified because of the way Saddam Hussein treated homosexuals and women. "It was a war of liberation!" :rolleyes:

[Red Commissar]

The full-veil/burka is not that widespread in France to justify people saying this is a necessary step against "islamic fundamentalism" or some victory for "feminism". To begin with I don't really think the Burka is worn by many of the immigrant communities in France, indeed they probably only constitute a small proportion. So what is this law being instituted for exactly? Sarko certainly didn't seem to give two shits about this earlier, nor his predecessor Chirac.

Take away the statements about fighting religious fundamentalism and protecting women, and you'll see this law for what it is- something to save face. Sarko's administration in the past few years has been caving to nativist sentiment in France and has focused itself on various segments of immigrants. Particularly now with the unpopularity of the austerity measures, the French government finds it necessary to deflect attention into an issue such as this.

At the end of the day, how is this going to help the French workers? That's what I look at, and frankly it doesn't do anything in that regard. It's only a way for the French government to rally cheap support and attempt to avoid discussion on its economic policies.

[Crux]

Can't people see that this is one form of totality totally enforcing itself upon another group? We're dealing with extreme liberal pretensions against what is perceived to be an Islamic threat. This is a direct result of the stupid clash of civilizations mantra and an Orientalist view of the East.

I do not support the veil but I also do not support liberal democratic hegemony over other people's lives. This is not the way to progress.

The militant anti-theism especially from Europe is extremely annoying.
This has very little to do with "militant anti-theism".

[∞]

IDK if most normal muslims care...eh, its not necessary, but I guess its a law that I almost support.


Good, this will preserve French identity against misogynistic Islamic fascism. The only problem now is to overthrow the French bourgeoisie and replace it with a workers' state.

Yeah random overthrow!

[the last donut of the night]

Good, this will preserve French identity against misogynistic Islamic fascism. The only problem now is to overthrow the French bourgeoisie and replace it with a workers' state.

wow you're either a racist or just fucking retarded

[Crux]

You shouldn't. This is just a part of racist onslaught against muslims, all muslims not just the tiny minority that wear the burqa. The right sure as hell know that is what it is. So shame on anyone considering themselves socialists, or indeed in any way progressive, supporting this ban. Do you really think Sarkozy's started caring about women's rights? Really?
As for the issue of burqas itself, the only soluition is to offer an alternative community in the suburbs than fundamentalism, and indeed in the long run islam, and all religion, itself.
So don't bloc with fascists, comrades.

[Devrim]

The full-veil/burka is not that widespread in France to justify people saying this is a necessary step against "islamic fundamentalism" or some victory for "feminism". To begin with I don't really think the Burka is worn by many of the immigrant communities in France, indeed they probably only constitute a small proportion.

Apparently about 1,000 women in France will be affected by this.

Devrim

[RadioRaheem84]

This has very little to do with "militant anti-theism".

Explain it then and what it's significance is to class struggle.

[Crux]

Explain it then and what it's significance is to class struggle.
It's the ruling class in a predominantly christian country using divide and conquer against a religious minority, the muslims. In fact they are attacking a small minority within that minority, but don't let that confuse you, as I said before the right wing themselves are very aware that this is an attack on the muslim minority itself. Therefore this law should be opposed, but so should the extremely small reactionary groups that impose the burqa. There is no contradiction as this law was not intended to free burqa wearing women in the first place.

[Devrim]

wow you're either a racist or just fucking retarded

I think that this quote best points out the worst aspects of the discussion on this thread.

Racism today is a lot more subtle than it used to be. Gone are the days when newspapers in England included NBNI* in housing classifieds and the Conservative Party used the slogan 'If you want a nigger for a neighbour, vote Labour' on billboards during a bye-election.

The racist campaigns of today don't appeal to basic all out crude racism because that sort of racism is no longer acceptable in society. If the Conservative Party were to try a poster like that today, they would find themselves in court very quickly and roundly condemned by all of the bourgeois media.

That doesn't mean that racism in any way has gone away, but its proponents today are much more insidious and subtle. Not only do they play on the fear of the other but also they prey on 'progressive instincts'. Many workers are quiet rightly disturbed by religious extremism. It is not just racists. I personally know Muslim workers in France who would certainly support this law.

Shrilly screaming racists at people will do nothing at all to break this mind set. What needs to de done is to patiently explain the context within which this campaign is emerging, and how it is aimed at deionising those from a North African, Middle East, or South East Asian background.

Not everybody who supports these kinds of laws is a racist. In Turkey we have long had laws prohibiting the wearing of head-scarves in public places, which certainly aren't racist, and a supported by large sectors of the working class, particularly women in the state sector.

What is evident in Western Europe is that there are people, despite not being racists themselves, and in some cases even actively opposed to racism, who are being dragged along in the wake of a racist campaign. What is necessary is to patiently explain to these people how this campaign is being used in society today, not to swear at them and accuse them of being racists.

Devrim

*No Blacks No Irish

[Rakhmetov]

Creeping Islam is making inroads into Western Europe and it won't be satisfied until the entire culture of those countries are Muslimified. If Islam conquers Western Europe that will spell a huge defeat for the workers because Islamo-fascism will drag the continent into a more retrograde mode of social production to wit: feudalism, much like Afghanistan today. I'd rather live in bourgeoisified France with all its glaring flaws than in Taliban-dominated Afghanistan any day. If Islamo-fascism conquers France workers would have to fight on two fronts--- against feudalism, and theocracy then later against capitalism when it re-emerges from the rotten soil of feudalism.

Needless to say, I don't support Bush's 3 wars in the middle-east and central Asia. I urge all Muslim to resist guerrilla-style. Having said that I will also say that I hate all religions and prefer the French ruling class than the feudal tribal landlords of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

[Crux]

Creeping Islam is making inroads into Western Europe and it won't be satisfied until the entire culture of those countries are Muslimified.
Creeping racism is making inroads into your posting and it won't be satisfied until you're a an out-and-out bigot. May I suggest a forum change to Stormfront?


If Islam conquers Western Europe that will spell a huge defeat for the workers because Islamo-fascism will drag the continent into a more retrograde mode of social production to wit: feudalism, much like Afghanistan today. I'd rather live bourgeoisified in France with all its glaring flaws than in Taliban-dominated Afghanistan any day. If Islamo-fascism conquers France workers would have to fight on two fronts--- against feudalism, and theocracy then later against capitalism when it re-emerges from the rotten soil of feudalism.
You're out of your mind. Islam does not create feudalism. Islam is not taking over europe nor did it create the economic situation in afghanistan. That you side with the french state is unsuprising, that's what racists do.

[Rakhmetov]

The great unmentionable evil at the center of our culture is monotheism. From a barbaric Bronze Age text known as the Old Testament, three anti-human religions have evolved--Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. These are sky-god religions. They are, literally, patriarchal--God is the Omnipotent Father--hence the loathing of women for 2,000 years in those countries afflicted by the sky-god and his earthly male delegates. The sky-god is a jealous god, of course. He requires total obedience from everyone on earth, as he is not just in place for one tribe, but for all creation. Those who would reject him must be converted or killed for their own good. Ultimately, totalitarianism is the only sort of politics that can truly serve the sky-god's purpose. Any movement of a liberal nature endangers his authority and those of his delegates on earth. One God, one King, one Pope, one master in the factory, one father-leader in the family at home.

http://archive.8m.net/vidal.htm (http://www.anonym.to/?http://archive.8m.net/vidal.htm)

[danyboy27]

Creeping Islam is making inroads into Western Europe and it won't be satisfied until the entire culture of those countries are Muslimified. If Islam conquers Western Europe that will spell a huge defeat for the workers because Islamo-fascism will drag the continent into a more retrograde mode of social production to wit: feudalism, much like Afghanistan today. I'd rather live bourgeoisified in France with all its glaring flaws than in Taliban-dominated Afghanistan any day. If Islamo-fascism conquers France workers would have to fight on two fronts--- against feudalism, and theocracy then later against capitalism when it re-emerges from the rotten soil of feudalism.

they are coming wraaaaaaa!

only 10% of the muslim population are hardcore fundamentalist nutjob. many moderate muslim speak out about extremism all the fucking time.

[Rakhmetov]

Ad hominem attacks seem to be your forte since you abandon all other rational and logical arguments.

[Rakhmetov]

they are coming wraaaaaaa!

only 10% of the muslim population are hardcore fundamentalist nutjob. many moderate muslim speak out about extremism all the fucking time.

You know these Islamists breed like rabbits. They don't believe in birth control while most of the secular European people are having fewer children. If you don't nip this in the bud you will have a state within a state and that will be fraught with all the kinds of issues you see in the former Yugoslavia and Chechnya.

I'm not a racist. If people want to practice their religion, that's fine. I'm tolerant enough to let people entertain their private superstitions. But when a man demands that a woman be covered head to toe like a freak then I have to demur.

[danyboy27]

Ad hominem attacks seem to be your forte since you abandon all other rational and logical arguments.

i didnt know fact where ad hominiem attack.

only 7% of the muslim are religious fundamentalist, that a damn fact.
http://hir.harvard.edu/its-the-policy-stupid

if well integrated, most of the second and third generation are usually even less prone to religious extremism.

the only reason why extremism thrive in place like France is the complete lack of effort from the people in power to integrate them in the society, and the bigoted xenophobic attitude of a lot of french Nationalist who been told by people like you that ''the evil muslim are coming to get them''

[danyboy27]

You know these Islamists breed like rabbits. They don't believe in birth control while most of the secular European people are having fewer children. If you don't nip this in the bud you will have a state within a state and that will be fraught with all the kinds of issues you see in the former Yugoslavia and Chechnya.

I'm not a racist. If people want to practice their religion, that's fine. I'm tolerant enough to let people entertain their private superstitions. But when a man demands that a woman be covered head to toe like a freak then I have to demur.

fail.

the jewish population have approximately the same number of extremist, they are called assidic jews. yes they have big families, yes many of those assidic jews are religious nuts, they dont believe in birth control either!

the fact that they are a bunch of nutcase contain the problem, beccause they will stay within their little group of crazies.

the only reason for the crazies to expand would be to radicalize the other jews/muslim/minorities by Persecuting them, making laws to make them conform to the society, make them feel subhumain.

that how you make creazy nutjob taking over a country, with hate, xenophobia, persecution , segrecation and isolation.

[Rakhmetov]

i didnt know fact where ad hominiem attack.

only 7% of the muslim are religious fundamentalist, that a damn fact.
http://hir.harvard.edu/its-the-policy-stupid

if well integrated, most of the second and third generation are usually even less prone to religious extremism.



Even if that 7% number is accurate than it is still a big number--- a base from which to expand especially with how Britain and AmeriKa love to invade Islamic countries. You underestimate or rather neglect to note that Muslims can become radicalized when nations invade their Mecca or Medina. How many Muslims do you think have already infiltrated Western Europe from Iraq, Afghanistan et al? Does anyone remember the terrorist attacks in Britain and Spain on 2004??

What about if successful revolutions occur in Europe?? Do you think Muslims will view this with equanimity??? They will still demand payback from the Europeans that invaded their countries. Osama Bin Laden will still be sending his terrorist hordes after Europe and AmeriKa.

[Rakhmetov]

fail.

the jewish population have approximately the same number of extremist, they are called assidic jews. yes they have big families, yes many of those assidic jews are religious nuts, they dont believe in birth control either!

the fact that they are a bunch of nutcase contain the problem, beccause they will stay within their little group of crazies.

the only reason for the crazies to expand would be to radicalize the other jews/muslim/minorities by Persecuting them, making laws to make them conform to the society, make them feel subhumain.

that how you make creazy nutjob taking over a country, with hate, xenophobia, persecution , segrecation and isolation.

So you're ready to sit back and YAWN while this problem escalates. Have you ever thought about what if you are wrong? Just entertain that possibility and give me your answer. I'll give you mine.

If I were President of France and the enforcement of the burqa ban promotes an increase in Islamic radicalism I would immediately recant my former position and allow the 1,000+ women who wear the burqa to live their lifestyle unmolested. I would issue a public and sincere apology and award monetary damages to the aggrieved parties. And that would be the end of story.

What about you???

[the last donut of the night]

Creeping Islam is making inroads into Western Europe and it won't be satisfied until the entire culture of those countries are Muslimified. If Islam conquers Western Europe that will spell a huge defeat for the workers because Islamo-fascism will drag the continent into a more retrograde mode of social production to wit: feudalism, much like Afghanistan today. I'd rather live in bourgeoisified France with all its glaring flaws than in Taliban-dominated Afghanistan any day. If Islamo-fascism conquers France workers would have to fight on two fronts--- against feudalism, and theocracy then later against capitalism when it re-emerges from the rotten soil of feudalism.

Needless to say, I don't support Bush's 3 wars in the middle-east and central Asia. I urge all Muslim to resist guerrilla-style. Having said that I will also say that I hate all religions and prefer the French ruling class than the feudal tribal landlords of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.


Now all you're doing is entertaining lies and becoming a fear mongerer, much like the European right wing.


Creeping Islam is making inroads into Western Europe and it won't be satisfied until the entire culture of those countries are Muslimified.

What does this even mean? Aside from not taking any sort of materialist position on Muslim immigration into Europe, you pander to right-wing paranoia. Last time I checked, class struggle move history along, not this liberal idealism of culture clash or whatever. The motivations for Muslim immigration into Western Europe do not belong to this single, unnamable entity you call "creeping Islam". It was European capitalists who needed cheap labour decades ago, and now they're using their work force as a scapegoat for various problems they created in the first place. So no, it's not the evil entity of Islam willfully planning to destroy your dellusion of what Western Europe is. Grow up and smell reality: you're a marxist (I hope), not Pim Fortuyn.


If Islam conquers Western Europe that will spell a huge defeat for the workers because Islamo-fascism will drag the continent into a more retrograde mode of social production to wit: feudalism, much like Afghanistan today.

When I first read this, I thought you were kidding. Sadly, not so.

1) Islam is not going to "conquer" Europe. It's not about religion fighting religion, or civilization clashing with civilization. It revolves around class, so your idea that Islam is a single being, crossing all class structures, is very, very wrong. And dangerous too, because it creates the idea that somehow all Muslims base their social consciousness on Islam, and not class, so all Muslisms (rich and poor) have the same interest, which in your mind is to destroy Western Europe. That is far from reality.

2) THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ISLAMO-FASCISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Understand that please.

3) If Islamo-fascism existed, why in God's sake would it return Western Europe to feudalism. Fascism is a product of capitalism, dude. Fascism never brought Germany or Italy back to a feudal way of production. But when it's scary brown people, it's all about regressing society to feudalism. :rolleyes:


I'd rather live in bourgeoisified France with all its glaring flaws than in Taliban-dominated Afghanistan any day.

Cool story dude. Again pandering to right-wing bullshit, I see.


Needless to say, I don't support Bush's 3 wars in the middle-east and central Asia.

Gee, thanks for the disclaimer.


I urge all Muslim to resist guerrilla-style.

So either Muslims are scary brown fascists that hate Western civilization (like such thing exists) or brown people who love guns. Thanks for telling them what to do; I don't think they could've done it without your wise inspiration, seen in your previous posts about them.


Having said that I will also say that I hate all religions and prefer the French ruling class than the feudal tribal landlords of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

It's not about choosing what class you prefer: it's capitalism nonetheless, bucko. It's about fighting for the oppressed, something you can't understand, because you have bought right-wing bullshittery about the Muslim working class.

What's next?

http://www.loonwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/eurabia.jpg

EURABIA!!!!!! PROTECT WHITE...ERM I MEAN PROGRESSIVE EUROPE, LIBERAL IDEALS BLA BLA BLA

[danyboy27]

So you're ready to sit back and YAWN while this problem escalates. Have you ever thought about what if you are wrong? Just entertain that possibility and give me your answer. I'll give you mine.

this problem escalate beccause of the lack of effort made by the society to integrate muslim, the dirrect result is the increase in people fallowing the creazy. stop ostracise them, give support to women and men who feel oppressed by their religion and want it out, create social program to allow those folks to integrate society.



If I were President of France and the enforcement of the burqa ban promotes an increase in Islamic radicalism I would immediately recant my former position and allow the 1,000+ women who wear the burqa to live their lifestyle unmolested. I would issue a public and sincere apology and award monetary damages to the aggrieved parties. And that would be the end of story.

What about you???
well, i wouldnt have made the ban in the first place.
i would have dirrected my effort toward better integration of minorities, and taking ANY god out of the institutions and laws, and modified the constitution to ensure that religion cannot mess with other people liberties.

[∞]

Dumbass: Ultimately, totalitarianism is the only sort of politics that can truly serve the sky-god's purpose.

Yes religion follows totalitarianism. Leninism and Maoism haven't had that history of toatlitarianism...forget Mao, Pol Pot, etc.:glare:

[∞]

the commie lynch mob...

I can see where Mengistu is coming from. As a female.. I can't think of too much that would be as equally oppressive as being forced to wear a burqa on the edicts of some patriarchic religion that I would most likely have been born into by chance. these woman are having acid thrown in their faces and being stoned to death for things that are pretty common place in the rest of the world. Fuck you guys for thinking otherwise.

This is about the Burqa in particular...honestly I don't see why its necessary to ban consenting women from following their religious dress code. Its what I say to pro-life supporters "Sure if you don't like abortion, don't do it." I have to follow my own advice and say, Fuck the patriarchal burqa...but if a women wants to wear it, I shouldn't care...

[the last donut of the night]

Yes religion follows totalitarianism. Leninism and Maoism haven't had that history of toatlitarianism...forget Mao, Pol Pot, etc.:glare:

Try finding any mention of the word "totalitarian" before 1917 and come back to me.

[coda]

<<...honestly I don't see why its necessary to ban consenting women >>

Well, there's your error -- you assume they're consenting...

[Tatarin]

The biggest problem with this "debate" isn't that it criticizes religion in itself. These very groups didn't mind all these muslims just a decade ago - of course not, back then the international jewish conspiracy was still "in". Check out all these parties, and they will have strong anti-immigration policies. However, their current power is to scare people now with how alien and dangerous Islam is.

What is more appalling is that no one seems to catch on the source of all these problems. One day, all muslims simply started to hate "the west" and try to take over it. Oh, and in worst case, they'll just overbreed "us" (because it is a hidden rule that anyone born from muslim parents will always remain a muslim).

The exact same arguments went through the air less than 100 years ago: jews were taking over! They breed, their culture is dangerous, they're not us. The very same madness had no problem invading other "not-us" countries - exactly what the west is doing right now!

The current anti-Islam outcry is just a shallow beginning on a piece of iceberg. If they get what they want, then next time it will be Africans, Slavs, Romas, and why not, Jews again?

Rather have people hating each other than an economic system that just now proved in everyones' face that it does not work.

Who knows, maybe it isn't coincidence that the reverend whatsisname wanted to burn a Quran now? Or that building a mosque in New York became such a big problem this year?

[KC]

Why isn't this racist restricted yet?

[danyboy27]

<<...honestly I don't see why its necessary to ban consenting women >>

Well, there's your error -- you assume they're consenting...

he dosnt assume nothing, there are conscenting women, and non consenting ones.

program should exist to help opressed women to get out of their opressed religion and encouraged to speak out if abused.

supporting a ban on the veil dosnt solve nothing.

[KC]

BTW I know plenty of Muslim women who choose to wear the hijab and see nothing sexist about it whatsoever. Nor do I necessarily find it sexist.

[Red Commissar]

BTW I know plenty of Muslim women who choose to wear the hijab and see nothing sexist about it whatsoever. Nor do I necessarily find it sexist.

Hijab is different from a Burka though. I wonder, would a full-face veil ban extend to a niqab as well?


the commie lynch mob...

I can see where Mengistu is coming from. As a female.. I can't think of too much that would be as equally oppressive as being forced to wear a burqa on the edicts of some patriarchic religion that I would most likely have been born into by chance. these woman are having acid thrown in their faces and being stoned to death for things that are pretty common place in the rest of the world. Fuck you guys for thinking otherwise.

So I'd imagine then you'd be cheering with Christopher Hitchens when an imperialist state invades a token country that practices Islam?

I don't recall these things being common place among the immigrant community in France anyways. Taking Devrim's figure of 1000, or even the article's figure of 2000, putting it to a conservative estimate of the immigrant population who are Muslim in France (~5 million in total), saying for convenience sake that half of them are women, it reveals a very small and insignificant proportion. I doubt it's a problem that Sarko and Co. are making it out to be. In fact it's mostly done on the same lines they're hitting up the Roma now too (we're doing it to stop child trafficking!).

To add another amusing angle at this, women who are caught with this get fined. Of course the law also stipulates punishments against males who force it upon them, but why the former requirement? That just sounds stupid to me.

Do you think this will really change anything for the women affected? Burka goes off but it doesn't change that they'll still be economically dependent or subordinated to males in their community. They face two issues, from within the more religious elements immigrant community who hold the male in higher regard, and the mainstream French society who look down on them for being immigrants.

Does this law change any of that? Does it empower affected women to escape from this? Hell no. It just removes an external characteristic while keeping the main social forces intact, be that the patriarchal characteristics of a more conservative Muslim or capitalism in the French state.

[KC]

Hijab is different from a Burka though. I wonder, would a full-face veil band extend to a niqab as well?The difference is quantitative (i.e. on what should be covered). One cannot state that the Hijab is not sexist while the Burka is and not be a hypocrite on this basis alone.

BTW I did make a point in saying that it is not necessarily sexist. I do not believe that the Hijab or the Burka or in and of themselves sexist (which is what is being asserted in this thread), although they can be in certain social/cultural situations.

[Red Commissar]

The difference is quantitative (i.e. on what should be covered). One cannot state that the Hijab is not sexist while the Burka is and not be a hypocrite on this basis alone.

BTW I did make a point in saying that it is not necessarily sexist. I do not believe that the Hijab or the Burka or in and of themselves sexist (which is what is being asserted in this thread), although they can be in certain social/cultural situations.

I know, but this law specifically singles out a full-face veil like a Burka. Hijabs are not in the coverage of this bill. But again it shows the mindset of the French lawmakers in question that it's not a case of women's rights that the defenders of the bill are making it out to be.

[coda]

Gee, KC, you don't find it sexist when it is only "woman" who are ascribed to wear it??

oh, right.. you have massive penis don't you? so of course!!!

Haaaa!! go fuck yourself

[∞]

Try finding any mention of the word "totalitarian" before 1917 and come back to me.

Right because Mao and Pol Pot had power before then...drop it, its not the topic at hand.

[KC]

I know, but this law specifically singles out a full-face veil like a Burka. Hijabs are not in the coverage of this bill. But again it shows the mindset of the French lawmakers in question that it's not a case of women's rights that the defenders of the bill are making it out to be.

I realize that; my comments in this thread were directed at those anti-theist posters who were attempting to argue that the Hijab/Burka are in and of themselves sexist (see below).


Gee, KC, you don't find it sexist when it is only "woman" who are ascribed to wear it??

Not necessarily, no. Is it sexist that women shave their legs and/or armpits and men don't? Am I sexist for believing that women with hairy legs are gross?



oh, right.. you have massive penis don't you? so of course!!!Not really, it's pretty average. Did you want to see it?

[∞]

it is obvious the majority posting in this thead (all men!) have chosen the right of barbaric religion custom over the equal liberation of woman-- a historic fight in its own right. I don't know what kind of variants of communism you think you are part of, but it is pretty shameful and telling that you support patriarchy of the worst kind over any kind revolution that is inclusive of woman. As a woman strongly against this sort of unilateral submission, i can say along with my female compatriots.. You are no comrade of ours!

comrade, comrade, liberation errrr

[KC]

It is obvious the majority posting in this thead (all men!) have chosen the right of barbaric religion custom over the equal liberation of woman-- a historic fight in its own right.

I think the vast majority of those in this thread who support this act on the grounds that it is sexist are choosing the right of the bourgeois state over the equal liberation of women by not giving women the choice to wear it (i.e. allowing the state to enforce its conception of "cultural norms" on these women without their concession and against their will). Not only is it patriarchal to women, but it also stems from an incredibly flawed outlook on religion - specifically Islam - and Middle Eastern/Persian/Arabic/etc... culture that ultimately leads to a condescending and disdainful view of everyone that is religious. It is completely divorced from reality.

And just because you have a vagina does not make you an authority on Islam or the culture of those of which we are speaking. Or anything, for that matter.

But good job avoiding any hint of discussion or debate and simply continuing to rant and rave. Now go ahead and call me a sexist for calling you out on your weak attempt at appealing to yourself as an authority on women's rights for simply being a woman (how much more full of yourself could you get?) as well as your decision to keep whining about how sexist us men are being for supporting the freedom of women to make their own choices and opposing the intervention of the state on womens' rights for the purposes of enforcing cultural homogeneity instead of addressing my points and actually contributing something to the discussion.

[zimmerwald1915]

It is obvious the majority posting in this thead (all men!) have chosen the right of barbaric religion custom over the equal liberation of woman-- a historic fight in its own right. I don't know what kind of variants of communism you think you are part of, but it is pretty shameful and telling that you support patriarchy of the worst kind over any kind revolution that is inclusive of woman. as a woman strongly against this sort of unilateral submission, I can say along with my female compatriots.. you are no comrade of ours!
I doubt very much we're actually talking about any sort of revolution here. What we're talking about is the policy of a faction of the French bourgeoisie, which is at this moment in charge of the bourgeois French state.

EDIT: ninja'd

[Bilan]

I don't quite understand why people are dressing this up as some sort of emancipatory move by the French state when...it's...not.
This isn't about gender.
That is, this legislation isn't being enacted for the benefit of women: it is legislation attacking a specific minority in France, a religious/cultural minority.

And on top of that, have people just ignored who is enacting this? This is Sarkozy. Sarkozy.

[KC]

The convergence of the anti-theist left and the Islamophobic right is not surprising in the least, really. They both make the same generalizations about Islam and the cultures in which it exists (i.e. it's "barbaric" and "against equality/democracy/whatever") without really doing any research on the subject or experiencing the religions/cultures they judge or getting to know anyone that is a part of that religion/culture. They merely preach hate from the comfort of their own ignorance based on watered down, filtered caricatures and generalizations that they develop based on their own preconceived outlook.

[coda]

oh, on the issue of vaginas over culture. tell me-- do you think woman of cross cultures can relate to common female experiences such as giving birth and being universal minorities in their respective environs or do you think language, religion or culture put up an impenetrable barriers?

btw.. i wait prostate for your all enlightenging and far superior spermicidal answer.

[KC]

Look KC.. there is no choice whether the woman wear the burqa in Islam.. you think there is a choice? clearly shows your lack of understanding there. Yes, there is a choice. I know plenty of Muslim women who choose not to wear it, as well. You merely further confirm my previous post with this ignorance.



oh, on the issue of vaginas over culture. tell me-- do you think woman of cross cultures can relate to common female experiences such as giving birth and being universal minorities in their respective environs or do you think language, religion or culture put up an impenetrable barriers?I think that your attempt to assert the power of your vagina over this debate is just as valid as an anti-choicer attempting to do so. It isn't relevant, whether you like it or not.

Now please keep on complaining about how I'm superior to you and defending this blatant attack on French minority communities. You merely further prove everything I have said.

[KC]

freeing woman from the constraints of some wacko religious law is attacking minorities??? woman are a minority!!!!!!

You are the one that is supporting the erosion of womens' rights by supporting the state forcing of women to dress in a certain manner.

If you read my previous posts instead of just whining about how sexist I am and about how you're automatically right because you're a female then I wouldn't have to repeat myself.



look why don't you wear the burka for a week.. put your mother and sister in the burka for a week during this outrageous heatwave that's been going on.. then report back and let me know how it went...

Why on earth would I do that?

[Rêve Rouge]

Look KC.. there is no choice whether the woman wear the burqa in Islam.. you think there is a choice? clearly shows your lack of understanding there.

Well, if I do recall, a burqa refers to the style of dress that covers a woman's body completely, including the face. You're saying there is no choice whether women wear the burqa in Islam? There are Muslim women who don't cover their faces.

Also, consider this situation:

Since you believe Muslim women don't have a choice whether to wear the burqa due to Islam and/or their husbands, would you support the fact that now Muslim women in France would have to suffer oppression from both Islam/Husband from being forced to wear the burqa, and being fined by the state? Wouldn't it be better to be free from oppression? It's highly doubtful that the banning of the burqa and niqab would get rid of Islam. So it would at least be better that the state wouldn't fine women for wearing the burqa, knowing that Islam and/or their husband would still force them to wear it in your case. That way Muslim women wouldn't have to suffer oppression from both Islam and/or their husbands, and oppression from the state for wearing the burqa.

[Devrim]

Creeping Islam is making inroads into Western Europe and it won't be satisfied until the entire culture of those countries are Muslimified.

The word would actually be 'Islamified', but more importantly what sort of inroads is it making?

If we take France as an example as it is the country at the centre of this discussion although it is illegal there to take religious data in the census, the French Ministry of the Interior estimates the number of Muslims as 4,155,000, or 6.6% of the population of metropolitan France. Muslims are obviously a very small minority.

However, it is worth asking how they define Muslims. It turns out that these figures include people from Muslim backgrounds who are not actually Muslims. Of this 4.16 million people only 36% described themselves as 'observant believers', and only 20% went regularly to the mosque ( what sort of observant belivers the 16% who don't go regular to the mosque are we will leave to their own conscience). 1 million people were described as " citizens of (Islam observing lineage) Muslim extraction but with no strong religious or cultural ties to Islam", i.e. not Muslims.

So the actual Muslim population of France is somewhere between 831,000 (those who go to the Mosque regularly) and 3,155,000, those who profess at some level to follow Islam, or to put it in percentile terms between 1.3% and 5% of the population, both of which are very small minorities.

Interestingly if we look at the inroads that Islam is making into French society, we see the number of converts put at 40,000, a number which is dwarfed by the 1,000,000 "citizens of (Islam observing lineage) Muslim extraction but with no strong religious or cultural ties to Islam". i.e. people who were born into Muslim families, but have rejected Islam. Indeed given the current racist immigration controls implemented across Europe, it would appear that the influence of Islam in France is not actual increasing, but declining.


If Islam conquers Western Europe...

When we look at the data from France the whole idea seems absurd, and we must remember that France is the country with the highest proportion of Muslims in Western Europe. One would expect an ıslamic fundamentalist to be at least somebody who regularly goes to the Mosque, and even if we accepted that the 831,000 Muslims in France who do regularly go to the Mosque were all suicide bomb wielding Jihadists lunatics something which I entirely doubt, I find it quite amazing that anybody would imagine that this 1.3% of the population, often from the most marginalised sectors of society are going to 'conquer' France.

Let's try to keep some sense of perspective here.


If Islam conquers Western Europe that will spell a huge defeat for the workers because Islamo-fascism will drag the continent into a more retrograde mode of social production to wit: feudalism, much like Afghanistan todayAfghanistan is a backward undeveloped country because it is a backward developed country. Iran, which is also a theocratic state, is a modern capitalist country, and in fact has a higher percentage of industrial workers than France, but the main point is there is actually no chance of this 1.3% of the population, and remember than is assuming that every regular practising Muslim is some sort of fundamentalist radical, will seize control of France.

Devrim

[RadioRaheem84]

If Islam conquers Western Europe...


If Islam conquers Western Europe that will spell a huge defeat for the workers because Islamo-fascism will drag the continent into a more retrograde mode of social production to wit: feudalism, much like Afghanistan today

Woah, Mengistu. Say it aint so, comrade!

Did you somehow join the Euston Manifesto Group while I was out on vay-cay?

What is with this New Atheist, Western Civ Rocks, Orientalist bullshit?

Afghanistan was brought to edge of feudalism not because of "Islamo-Fascism", but because of US financing and meddling into Afghan politics which brought the end of the secular leftist government of Afghanistan.

I swear this Hitchean bullshit is really irritating me. You're not somehow on the cusp of something new that will be remembered as grand and visionary. It's not about being an independent thinker too. It's about being an indirect apologist for western chauvinism.

[Devrim]

Look KC.. there is no choice whether the woman wear the burqa in Islam.. you think there is a choice? clearly shows your lack of understanding there.

As only between 1,000 and 2,000 women in France wear a burqa, and as there are about 3,000,000 Muslims in France, about half of whom we can assume to be women, I would imagine that there is a choice, and that it is a choice that most Muslim women don't make.

Amongst the 1,000 to 2,000 who do wear it I am sure that there is some compulsion. However, I very much doubt that a law like this will free them from that compulsion, but rather would confine them to the home.

Devrim

[RadioRaheem84]

Not only that but what about the women that of their own free will wish to adhere to the practice of wearing a burqa? Woudn't that impede on their freedom of religion?

[Crimson Commissar]

they are coming wraaaaaaa!

only 10% of the muslim population are hardcore fundamentalist nutjob. many moderate muslim speak out about extremism all the fucking time.
Doesn't change the fact that the quran itself endorses extremism and discrimination against non-muslims.

[bricolage]

Doesn't change the fact that the quran itself endorses extremism and discrimination against non-muslims.
So does every religious text if you cherry pick it how you wish. Funny how this only gets brought up in regards to the Koran though isn't it?

[bricolage]

I don't quite understand why people are dressing this up as some sort of emancipatory move by the French state when...it's...not.
This isn't about gender.
That is, this legislation isn't being enacted for the benefit of women: it is legislation attacking a specific minority in France, a religious/cultural minority.

And on top of that, have people just ignored who is enacting this? This is Sarkozy. Sarkozy.
This. The discourse of female emancipation is one of the new tools Western state leaders are drudging up in the villification of Muslim communities, it doesn't mean they believe in it and its a shame so many people here have bought into it.

[graymouser]

very clever and typically condescending. I don't support anything of the state. Nor infered that I was automatically right because I’m a female. Those type of qualifiers are distinctive of this issue. I gave a female communist anarchist persepective which is pretty standard. State, religious and patriarchic subordination are rejected outright and is antithetical to all forms of communism and it's variants. There's not too much else to say in favor of supporting and defending religious oppression under the guise of religious freedom when it keeps a part of it's marginized group in a permanent powerless subservient position. It's a no brainer, really.
Yet you condemn those who unequivocally denounce the racist action of the French state in this thread. That is what we are talking about. The fact that it's over headscarves is a side show, and the issues that accompany the burqa and other forms of veiling have to be dealt with by workers in those communities, not through the agency of the French bourgeois state.

Trying to tackle this as primarily a question of women's liberation means that you are saying that the French government is the defender of women's rights, and leaving this struggle in the hands of an imperialist state. We are not saying that wearing a veil of any sort is "right" or "wrong" here; I think that it should be a free choice and solely at the woman's discretion. The issue is whether or not the racist, imperialist, capitalist French government has any right to say whether or not women do so - and any communist of any kind should know damn well that the answer is no.

[mossy noonmann]

As Devrim pointed out the burqa does not have a big following in france. The women who choose to wear the burqa or niqab probably numbers in the hundreds. That the French right a have chosen this a stick to beat the left with comes a no surprise when you see the reactions from politicians and commentaters of the 'left'.

This ban is a godsend for the normally new converts to islam who CHOOSE to dress in this way. The historian benjamin storra talks about the Choice to wear these things are usually a potlical reaction to the way Islam and Muslims in general are treated by the west throughout the world. That some women are forced to wear these garments is , of course, wrong. But there are, as i'm sure the senate is aware, laws against this.

That anybody can think that having the state decide that an alredy oppressed minority should have more laws passed against them , giving the french police even more power to harass people is surprising.

To finish an anecdote on what i saw a few months ago. Two young women ( i knew they were young from the speed they were moving) were in my local supermarket carpark wearing the Niqab they were given a severe talking to by quite a few women of North African descent. Ive never seen anybody else wearing the niqab and i've never seen anybody wearing the Burqa.

Surely this is a better way to deal with the 'problem' than having Muslim women nicked by the old bill.

I'm also looking forward to the Saudi women who are loaded and come to do there shopping on the Champs elysee getting nicked in the spirit of equality. But this will not happen becuase this is not who the law is aimed against.

[Rakhmetov]

Most of you patriarchal supporters of the burqa neglect to note the dangers of child abuse. At what age, pray tell, do parents force this burqa on their daughters??? At the "age of accountability" (whatever that means). Twelve year old girls, 13 year old or at any age is completely unacceptable!!!

:mad::crying::rolleyes::bored:

[Devrim]

I'm also looking forward to the Saudi women who are loaded and come to do there shopping on the Champs elysee getting nicked in the spirit of equality. But this will not happen becuase this is not who the law is aimed against.

Officially it also applies to foreign tourists. However I think the €150 fine itself would put that big a dent into the pockets of many Saudi princes.

Devrim

[Rakhmetov]

Officially it also applies to foreign tourists. However I think the €150 fine itself would put that big a dent into the pockets of many Saudi princes.

Devrim

All right I'm also in favor of levying a hefty fine for first time "offenders."

[graymouser]

Most of you patriarchal supporters of the burqa neglect to note the dangers of child abuse. At what age, pray tell, do parents force this burqa on their daughters??? At the "age of accountability" (whatever that means). Twelve year old girls, 13 year old or at any age is completely unacceptable!!!
This has nothing to do with supporting or opposing the burqa. It has everything to do with opposing the right of the French government to force women to wear, or not wear, the burqa. You cannot leave the task of women's liberation to a bourgeois state - it has to be done by workers, particularly women workers. Your faith in the French government's ability to liberate Muslim women is sadly misplaced.

[Bilan]

<<is legislation attacking a specific minority in France, a religious/cultural minority.>>

freeing woman from the constraints of some wacko religious law is attacking minorities??? woman are a minority!!!!!!

France:

(Total) 62,342,668 (Males) 30,311,870 (Females) 32,030,798


Anyway, women are an oppressed group. Yes.
And again you're assuming that this has anything to do with 'freeing' women. That is an assumption not based on reality; an assumption which does not reflect the reality of modern society.



look why don't you wear the burka for a week.. put your mother and sister in the burka for a week during this outrageous heatwave that's been going on.. then report back and let me know how it went...

I don't have a sister, and neither my mother, nor am I, a Muslim. So I will not be wearing a burka.
However, this isn't the issue. You've completely missed the point because you've derailed your own thoughts, and made an assumption that it's about one thing (gender liberation) when it's about another (racial vilification).

And if you read the statistics, the number of women in France who wear the Burka (relative to the amount who are Muslim and do not), you would realise (very quickly) that this is a tiny, tiny minority within the Islamic community.

And you're also forgetting that legislation like this tends to have no positive impact whatsoever.

[Rakhmetov]

This has nothing to do with supporting or opposing the burqa. It has everything to do with opposing the right of the French government to force women to wear, or not wear, the burqa. You cannot leave the task of women's liberation to a bourgeois state - it has to be done by workers, particularly women workers. Your faith in the French government's ability to liberate Muslim women is sadly misplaced.

Everthing a bourgeois state does is not related to oppressing workers. Generally it is so but not exclusively. If tomorrow the Amerikan bourgeois state passes a uniform national health insurance bill (like the one in the U.K.) could that law be construed as oppressing workers??? I don't think so.

[Devrim]

Most of you patriarchal supporters of the burqa neglect to note the dangers of child abuse. At what age, pray tell, do parents force this burqa on their daughters??? At the "age of accountability" (whatever that means). Twelve year old girls, 13 year old or at any age is completely unacceptable!!!

I don't think that anybody hear supporters the burqa. What people are objecting too is the racist campaign against people from North African, Middle Eastern and South East Asia, and the state interfering in people's lives.

Personally I think that Islam is a reactionary religion, and that the Burqa is a piece of clothing designed to reinforce patriarchy. I in no way support it.

There will undoubtedly be children who are forced to wear it. I would imagine that it is actually very few. The English language press are giving the number of people who wear this as 2,000, whereas the Turkish press is putting it at 1,000. Either way it is very small, and I doubt many of them are children who are forced to wear it for two reasons.

Firstly if you grow up in that sort of household, and remember that wearing a burqa is not common amongst French Muslims, even if we were to take the figure in the British press that would mean about 0.06% of French Muslim women wear it*, I would imagine that this sort of upbringing would be inclined to influence you who to want to wear it.

Secondly and more importantly in my experience lots of women who take up the burqa are doing it of their own choice. A friend of mine works in a Paris school and here experience is that it is something being taken up by the younger generation whose parents don't wear it. To recount a personal experience I remember a young girl coming into my work wearing a headscarf (and me not embarrassingly recognising her and asking if she was new), who four days later stopped wearing it as she had been told by her father that she wasn't allowed to wear it.

Unfortunately though you are right some children must be forced to wear it. However, I would imagine that the numbers are much smaller than the numbers who take it up of their own choice. Nor do I think that it would be an exaggeration to say that, particularly in Europe, many of those who do are doing it, amongst other reasons, because they feel that it is a mark of identity in a society that seems to be totally against them.

Of course the Imams and other social conservatives will use this new law to try to further draw people back towards Islam, and remember that nearly 25% of the population of France that are 'citizens of (Islam observing lineage) Muslim extraction' have 'no strong religious or cultural ties to Islam', which means in simple terms that a quarter of 'Muslims' in France have actually abandoned Islam. I would imagine that there are many Imams who are secretly pleased by this law as it will allow them to tighten a grip on their flock that was basically falling apart. And of course, there best allies are the far right and those who support this law.

Incidentally if you are talking about girls of high school age being forced to wear it, they certainly weren't forced to when going to school even before this new ban, as it was already banned in French schools.

Devrim

*Taking the number of Muslims in France as 3.1 million and assuming an equal sex ratio. Actually sex ratios tend to be about 52:48 in favour of women so the number would be slightly lower.

[Rakhmetov]

I am not a racist. People from Muslim countries should be allowed entry into Western Europe and the UK but they should leave all vestiges of of patriarchy behind.

[bricolage]

I am not a racist. People from Muslim countries should be allowed entry into Western Europe and the UK but they should leave all vestiges of of patriarchy behind.
How dare they sully the genderless world of Western Europe and the UK with their vestiges of patriarchy.

[Crux]

It is obvious the majority posting in this thead (all men!) have chosen the right of barbaric religion custom over the equal liberation of woman-- a historic fight in its own right. I don't know what kind of variants of communism you think you are part of, but it is pretty shameful and telling that you support patriarchy of the worst kind over any kind revolution that is inclusive of woman. as a woman strongly against this sort of unilateral submission, I can say along with my female compatriots.. you are no comrade of ours!
You really think blocing with the far right and others pandering to xenophobia will help women's right's? Really? You believe the state banning burtqa will solve the problem? Is it completely incocivable for you that one might be opposed to conservative and reactionary religion and still oppose a effeorts from a government desperatly playing the racism"Scary muslims"-card? It's pretty crystal clear to me. That's saying nothing about Haile here who has posted thing's that are basically carbon copy what I get fromr acists here in sweden.

So how do we solve the problem of reactionary religious group gaining influence? Try not using the borgeois state and the far right (who more often than not have their own religous agendas) to "help", organize in the immigrant communities. Organize women's groups, organize for social issues. It shouldn't be an all that complicated concept to understand.

[Crux]

I am not a racist. People from Muslim countries should be allowed entry into Western Europe and the UK but they should leave all vestiges of of patriarchy behind.
There's no patriarchy in europe?
Obvious racist is obvious.

[Rakhmetov]

How dare they sully the genderless world of Western Europe and the UK with their vestiges of patriarchy.

I don't see Western leaders requiring women to wear burqas. Yes there is plenty of patriarchy in Europe---very subtle patriarchy that needs to be exposed. That is why overt patriarchy needs to be combated before it roots itself in the European body politic.

[RadioRaheem84]

Yeah, go Western Civ!

Seriously please do not tell me you're a Theo Van Gogh supporter and read Ayaan Hirsi Ali?

[bricolage]

I don't see Western leaders requiring women to wear burqas.
As far as I know it was only ever enforced as mandatory clothing under Taliban run Afghanistan and in certain parts of Saudi Arabia still. Two states (one that doesn't exist any more) doesn't really equate to the image you paint.


Yes there is plenty of patriarchy in Europe---very subtle patriarchy that needs to be exposed.I don't think it is subtle at all. wage differentials or perceptions of housekeeping or child rearing, to give two examples, are very real and obvious.


That is why overt patriarchy needs to be combated before it roots itself in the European body politic.I'm afraid you are a bit late for that, and I'm also afraid that your rapid Islamophobic sentiments aren't going to do anything to combat patriarchy, only strengthen the marginalisation and systematic exclusion of minority Muslim populations.

[mossy noonmann]

I don't see Western leaders requiring women to wear burqas. Yes there is plenty of patriarchy in Europe---very subtle patriarchy that needs to be exposed. That is why overt patriarchy needs to be combated before it roots itself in the European body politic.

no they don't require them to wear burqas but on average in france a womens pension is thirty five percent less than a mans. not that subtle.
in fact i would say quite overt, so why are they not combatting this?

BECUASE THIS IS NOT ABOUT LIBERATING WOMEN !

this is about trying to grab voters from the far right and suring up sarkos voters and the acceptance of their arguments about this by the 'left' baffles me, really.

[zimmerwald1915]

Everthing a bourgeois state does is not related to oppressing workers. Generally it is so but not exclusively. If tomorrow the Amerikan bourgeois state passes a uniform national health insurance bill (like the one in the U.K.) could that law be construed as oppressing workers??? I don't think so.
Not to go off topic, but American capitalism won't permit the construction of a UK-like health insurance scheme, the American bourgeoisie knows this, and consequentially, cannot and will not pass such a bill. That your argument of choice is to slide gleefully into idealist fantasy-land says much about the position you've taken in this thread in general, as has been pointed out.

[graymouser]

Everthing a bourgeois state does is not related to oppressing workers. Generally it is so but not exclusively. If tomorrow the Amerikan bourgeois state passes a uniform national health insurance bill (like the one in the U.K.) could that law be construed as oppressing workers??? I don't think so.
This is entirely specious as a comparison. Giving healthcare is a situation where a bourgeois government, attempting to create "social peace," gives the workers one of their social demands. It's also beneficial to many employers, who no longer have to pay for health insurance, although obviously it comes at the expense of the insurance industry. This does not compare to banning veils, which specifically is an act directed against a section of the working class.

You have chosen to blind yourself to the class context of this action, and are giving praise to a policy chosen specifically because it will pander to the worst reactionaries in France.

[maskerade]

freedom from religion, not freedom of religion.

but telling people what they can't wear is fucked up. Funnily enough, it always seems that these things are proposed by liberals - don't they at least pretend to care about personal freedom anymore?

Islamophobia is the biggest supporter of American imperialism in the middle east

[the last donut of the night]

I am not a racist. People from Muslim countries should be allowed entry into Western Europe and the UK but they should leave all vestiges of of patriarchy behind.

Funny. I doubt you'd say the same for uhm, the American soldiers in Afghanistan or Iraq to leave all sexism, homophobia, and patriarchy behind, would you?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I don't like the face-veil. It's dehumanising - facial expressions form one of the bases of personal interaction. One can miss a lot of important social cues if the face is covered.

But this law is rubbish for various reasons, pointed out by others here. It won't achieve a damn thing except radicalisation on both sides.

By far the best way for the veil to disappear would be if groups that practiced it were allowed to assimilate, instead of being confined to their own enclaves in order to satisfy the bourgeois requirement of "multi-culturalism".

[Bilan]

I am not a racist. People from Muslim countries should be allowed entry into Western Europe and the UK but they should leave all vestiges of of patriarchy behind.

What is this a response to?

[zimmerwald1915]

What is this a response to?
This?


Woah, Mengistu. Say it aint so, comrade!

Did you somehow join the Euston Manifesto Group while I was out on vay-cay?

What is with this New Atheist, Western Civ Rocks, Orientalist bullshit?

Afghanistan was brought to edge of feudalism not because of "Islamo-Fascism", but because of US financing and meddling into Afghan politics which brought the end of the secular leftist government of Afghanistan.

I swear this Hitchean bullshit is really irritating me. You're not somehow on the cusp of something new that will be remembered as grand and visionary. It's not about being an independent thinker too. It's about being an indirect apologist for western chauvinism.

[maskerade]

I don't like the face-veil. It's dehumanising - facial expressions form one of the bases of personal interaction. One can miss a lot of important social cues if the face is covered.

But this law is rubbish for various reasons, pointed out by others here. It won't achieve a damn thing except radicalisation on both sides.

By far the best way for the veil to disappear would be if groups that practiced it were allowed to assimilate, instead of being confined to their own enclaves in order to satisfy the bourgeois requirement of "multi-culturalism".

I could not have said it better comrade! though to be fair, i don't like the word assimilate (i've watched too much star trek!). This whole debate reminds me of my biggest fear of nationalism - that most of it is very subtle and subconscious - cultural values tied to a national identity. Like Lenin said, nationalism is a strong emotion, and it is easily abused, and in many european countries, governments and political parties are making this debate into an us vs. them dichotomy

Though I have to say, we should not, as leftists, be defending organised religion and its rituals, rites and customs. In all honesty, i think veils are terrible, and I would rather that they were not used anywhere. But the simple honest truth is that if this was a western, christian practice, it would be encouraged...

[∞]

I wish had discussion on more important issues...

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I could not have said it better comrade! though to be fair, i don't like the word assimilate (i've watched too much star trek!).

If you think about it, cultural assimilation of immigrants is the last thing the ruling classes want; it would give them fewer things with which to divide and alienate the working class from itself...

[maskerade]

If you think about it, cultural assimilation of immigrants is the last thing the ruling classes want; it would give them fewer things with which to divide and alienate the working class from itself...

too true mate! but maybe its just from my misunderstanding of the word. I have Sami heritage, and they were forcefully assimilated into Swedish culture back in the days, and it sorted of destroyed a lot of their culture. I try not to be biased with these things, but its hard.

Integration just sounds friendlier

[KC]

If you think about it, cultural assimilation of immigrants is the last thing the ruling classes want; it would give them fewer things with which to divide and alienate the working class from itself...

Capitalists are not united. The idea that this is a conspiracy to divide the working class is patently absurd.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Capitalists are not united. The idea that this is a conspiracy to divide the working class is patently absurd.

There doesn't have to be a conspiracy; it's naturally in their interest whether they consciously realise it or not.

[Adi Shankara]

While I don't know the situation in France, I've been to Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA a few times, which is a city with a large muslim concentration, and I can tell you that the Burqa/Hijab is pretty much harmless.
Most of them come from Somalia, (numbering about 100,000 or so in a metro of 2,000,000, and some highly concentrated areas) which is known as one of the most conservative stalwarts of Islam on earth, and everyone...gets along just fine here. Girls wear burqas to school, just like there are Somali girls who don't. They don't have to wear them, but many choose to (a poll from a while back by the Star Tribune showed a majority of Somali woman supported the burqa) as a sign of cultural pride. Mosques coexist peacefully with churches and even atheist groups (like at the state fair there. they jostled but it was just heated debate, no violence or insults).

I don't know why France can't be more like Minneapolis, which is probably one of the most religiously/racially tolerant cities I know of.

[Adi Shankara]

If you think about it, cultural assimilation of immigrants is the last thing the ruling classes want; it would give them fewer things with which to divide and alienate the working class from itself...

Was it Marx who originally proposed that as the origin of racism in modern society? Or am I thinking of someone else?

[Devrim]

By far the best way for the veil to disappear would be if groups that practiced it were allowed to assimilate, instead of being confined to their own enclaves in order to satisfy the bourgeois requirement of "multi-culturalism".

The idea of the French state is assimilation as opposed to 'multi-culturism', which is traditionally the British policy. It doesn't appear to be working.

Devrim

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The idea of the French state is assimilation as opposed to 'multi-culturism', which is traditionally the British policy. It doesn't appear to be working

What a bourgeois state does and what it says are two different things though, aren't they? I'm pretty sure I remember reading about significant economic divides between immigrant and indigenous populations in France, if not geographical ones.

Besides, laws like this are counter-productive to assimilation. If that really was their policy, surely they'd behave differently...

[lyng]

Karl for a short comment:


And most important of all! Every industrial and commercial centre in England now possesses a working class divided into two hostile camps, English proletarians and Irish proletarians. The ordinary English worker hates the Irish worker as a competitor who lowers his standard of life. In relation to the Irish worker he regards himself as a member of the ruling nation and consequently he becomes a tool of the English aristocrats and capitalists against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination over himself. He cherishes religious, social, and national prejudices against the Irish worker. His attitude towards him is much the same as that of the “poor whites” to the Negroes in the former slave states of the U.S.A.. The Irishman pays him back with interest in his own money. He sees in the English worker both the accomplice and the stupid tool of the English rulers in Ireland.


This antagonism is artificially kept alive and intensified by the press, the pulpit, the comic papers, in short, by all the means at the disposal of the ruling classes. This antagonism is the secret of the impotence of the English working class, despite its organisation. It is the secret by which the capitalist class maintains its power. And the latter is quite aware of this.




marxists org archive marx works 1870 letters 70_04_09 htm

[mossy noonmann]

The idea of the French state is assimilation as opposed to 'multi-culturism', which is traditionally the British policy. It doesn't appear to be working.

Devrim

not working at all really. One of the reasons why the 'constitutional left' tie themelves in knots about religon is that in theory religon is supposed to be a completely private matter and completely seperate from the state. that this has never been the case didn't seem to bother anyone too greatly (except some of the left) when it was christians who would wear dresses or penguin costumes, now that muslims want the same rights everybody goes beserk. You also have sarko (supposed to guarantee the equaility and respect for the constitution) saying things like ' the teacher can never replace the preist'. Also catholic schools although nominally private are funded by the state, Now muslims want the same perks etc.........

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

not working at all really. One of the reasons why the 'constitutional left' tie themelves in knots about religon is that in theory religon is supposed to be a completely private matter and completely seperate from the state. that this has never been the case didn't seem to bother anyone too greatly (except some of the left) when it was christians who would wear dresses or penguin costumes, now that muslims want the same rights everybody goes beserk. You also have sarko (supposed to guarantee the equaility and respect for the constitution) saying things like ' the teacher can never replace the preist'. Also catholic schools although nominally private are funded by the state, Now muslims want the same perks etc.........

Heh. To think that France has a reputation for being secular... :rolleyes:

[The Red Next Door]

I can't believe I'm having this argument with "leftists" who support the burqa-esque oppression of women!

If we do not draw the line with the burqa then the Islamo-fascists will introduce into Western Europe clitoridectomy and fibulation and other misogynistic practices. An estimated 100 million young girls are subjected to these "cultural practices" in Africa and the Middle-East. Those Islamo-fascists who say "respect our culture" are just seeking license to commit crimes against the more vulnerable members of their society. What's next?--- respecting stoning to death for adultery in France?



P.S. the moderator who subtracted 5 points from my rep for the comments I've posted in this thread is only aiding and abetting the backward culture of Islamo-fascism and misogynism.

I recommend everyone to read Dr. Parenti's The Culture Struggle, including the chapters entitled "The Custom Against Women", "The Global Rape Culture," & "The Hazard of Cultural Relativism."


(The following is a revised excerpt from Parenti's newest book, THE CULTURE STRUGGLE)
If we uncritically immerse ourselves in the cultural context of any society, seeing it only as it sees itself, then we are embracing the self-serving illusions it has of itself. Perceiving a society "purely on its own terms" usually means seeing it through the eyes of dominant groups that exercise a preponderant influence in shaping its beliefs and practices. Furthermore, the dominant culture frequently rests on standards that are not shared by everyone within the society itself. So we come upon a key question: whose culture is it anyway? Too often what passes for the established culture of a society is the exclusive preserve of the privileged, a weapon used against more vulnerable elements.
This is seen no more clearly than in the wrongdoing perpetrated against women. A United Nations report found that prejudice and violence against women "remain firmly rooted in cultures around the world."
In many countries, including the United States, women endure discrimination in wages, occupational training, and job promotion. According to a New York Times report (6/18/04), in sub-Saharan Africa women cannot inherit or own land-even though they cultivate it and grow 80 percent of the continent's food.
It is no secret that women are still denied control over their own reproductive activity. Throughout the world about eighty million pregnancies a year are thought to be unwanted or ill-timed. And some twenty million unsafe illegal abortions are performed annually, resulting in the deaths of some 78,000 women yearly, with millions more sustaining serious injury.
In China and other Asian countries where daughters are seen as a liability, millions of infant females are missing, having been aborted or killed at birth or done in by neglect and underfeeding.
An estimated hundred million girls in Africa and the Middle East have been genitally mutilated by clitoridectomy (excision of the clitoris) or infibulation (excision of the clitoris, labia minor, and inner walls of the labia majora, with the vulva sewed almost completely shut, allowing an opening about the circumference of a pencil).
The purpose of such mutilation is to drastically diminish a woman's capacity for sexual pleasure, insuring that she remains her husband's compliant possession. Some girls perish in the excision process (usually performed by an older female with no medical training). Long term consequences of infibulation include obstructed menstrual flow, chronic infection, hurtful coitus, and complicated childbirth.
In much of the Middle East, women have no right to drive cars or appear in public unaccompanied by a male relative. They have no right to initiate divorce proceedings but can be divorced at the husband's will.
In Latin American and Islamic countries, men sometimes go unpunished for defending their "honor" by killing their allegedly unfaithful wives or girlfriends. In fundamentalist Islamic Iran, the law explicitly allows for the execution of adulterous women by stoning, burning, or being thrown off a cliff.
In countries such as Bangladesh and India, women are murdered so that husbands can remarry for a better dowry. An average of five women a day are burned in dowry-related disputes in India, and many more cases go unreported. In Bihar, India, women found guilty of witchcraft are still burned to death. In modern-day Ghana, there exist prison camps for females accused of being witches. In contrast, male fetish priests in Ghana have free reign with their magic practices. These priests often procure young girls from poor families that are said to owe an ancestral debt to the priest's forebears. The girls serve as the priests' sex slaves. The ones who manage to escape are not taken back by their fearful families. To survive, they must either return to the priest shrine or go to town and become prostitutes.
Millions of young females drawn from all parts of the world are pressed into sexual slavery, in what amounts to an estimated $7 billion annual business. More than a million girls and boys, many as young as five and six, are conscripted into prostitution in Asia, and perhaps an equal number in the rest of the world.
Pedophiles from the United States and other countries fuel the Asian traffic. Enjoying anonymity and impunity abroad, these "sex tourists" are inclined to treat their acts of child rape as legal and culturally acceptable. In Afghanistan under the Taliban, women were captives in their own homes, prohibited from seeking medical attention, working, or going to school. The U.S. occupation of Afghanistan was hailed by President Bush Jr. as a liberation of Afghani women.
In fact, most of that country remains under the control of warlords who oppose any move toward female emancipation. And the plight of rural women has become yet more desperate. Scores of young women have attempted self-immolation to escape family abuse and unwanted marriages. "During the Taliban we were living in a graveyard, but we were secure," opined one female activist. "Now women are easy marks for rapists and armed marauders." In Iraq we find a similar pattern: the plight of women worsening because of a U.S. invasion. Saddam Hussein's secular Baath Party created a despotic regime (fully backed by Washington during its most murderous period). But the Baathists did allow Iraqi women rights that were unparalleled in the Gulf region. Women could attend university, travel unaccompanied, and work alongside men in various professions. They could choose whom to marry or refrain from getting married.
But with the growing insurgency against the U.S. occupation, females are now targeted by the ascendant Islamic extremists. Clerics have imposed new restrictions on them. Women are forced to wear the traditional head covering, and girls spend most of their days indoors confined to domestic chores.
Most Iraqi women are now deprived of public education. Often the only thing left to read is the Koran. Many women fear they will never regain the freedom they enjoyed under the previous regime. As one Iraqi feminist noted, "The condition of women has been deteriorating. . . . This current situation, this fundamentalism, is not even traditional. It is desperate and reactionary." For all the dramatic advances made by women in the United States, they too endure daunting victimization. Tens of thousands of them either turn to prostitution because of economic need or are forced into it by a male exploiter--and kept there by acts of violence and intimidation.
An estimated three out of four women in the USA are victims of a violent crime sometime during their lifetime. Every day, four women are murdered by men to whom they have been close. Murder is the second leading cause of death among young American women.
In the USA domestic violence is the leading cause of injury among females of reproductive age. An estimated three million women are battered each year by their husbands or male partners, often repeatedly.
Statistically, a woman's home is her most dangerous place--if she has a man in it.
Battered women usually lack the financial means to escape, especially if they have children. When they try, their male assailants are likely to come after them and inflict still worse retribution. Police usually are of little help. Arrest is the least frequent response to domestic violence. In most states, domestic beatings are classified as a misdemeanor.
Women who kill their longtime male abusers in desperate acts of self-defense usually end up serving lengthy prison sentences. In recent times, women's organizations have had some success in providing havens for battered women and pressuring public authorities to move against male violence.
To conclude, those who demand respect for their culture may have a legitimate claim or they may really be seeking license to oppress the more vulnerable elements within their society.
There may be practices in any culture, including our own, that are not worthy of respect. And there are basic rights that transcend all cultures, as even governments acknowledge when they outlaw certain horrific customs and sign international accords in support of human rights. ______________
Michael Parenti's recent books include Superpatriotism (City Lights), The Assassination of Julius Caesar (New Press), and most recently, The Culture Struggle (Seven Stories Press). For more information visit: www.michaelparenti.org (http://www.michaelparenti.org).


I don't you are getting it.

[The Red Next Door]

Mariam, I do not see how you personally called yourself a communist and support this kind of bullshit, it may sound like a good idea but this law have a dark meaning to it. I do not think you understand what this law is trying to do or maybe you do understand this law, and if you do then your ass need to be restricted, because i am starting to smell Islamphobia on the breath of your typing.

[Volcanicity]

While I don't know the situation in France, I've been to Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA a few times, which is a city with a large muslim concentration, and I can tell you that the Burqa/Hijab is pretty much harmless.
Most of them come from Somalia, (numbering about 100,000 or so in a metro of 2,000,000, and some highly concentrated areas) which is known as one of the most conservative stalwarts of Islam on earth, and everyone...gets along just fine here. Girls wear burqas to school, just like there are Somali girls who don't. They don't have to wear them, but many choose to (a poll from a while back by the Star Tribune showed a majority of Somali woman supported the burqa) as a sign of cultural pride. Mosques coexist peacefully with churches and even atheist groups (like at the state fair there. they jostled but it was just heated debate, no violence or insults).

I don't know why France can't be more like Minneapolis, which is probably one of the most religiously/racially tolerant cities I know of.
Probably because France is run by a right-wing xenophobic little shit named Sarkozy.