Talk:Burqa

Women's rights in Islam
Quick question: what percentage of Muslim countries have elected female heads of state or women to high positions of power (weight by population)? I think the answer to this question will be very helpful when discussing this matter. Mr. Anon (talk) 04:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The only example of a female head of government in a Muslim country that springs to mind immediately is Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan, who was assassinated a few years ago. 04:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * TOW has a list. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:46, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * don't forget Kadisha and Aiesha.--[[Image:green mowse.png|25px]]Godot When I graduated, Cognative Science of Religion didn't even exist! now it's everywhere 04:53, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you talking about Khadijah and Aisha, Muhammad's wives? 05:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * As I thought. The three most populous Islamic countries have elected female heads of state. Plus India, which has a huge Muslim population. And the United States, champion of equality over those primitive Muslim countries, has yet to see one. Mr. Anon (talk) 04:55, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note:I'm not saying radical Islam does not have problems when it comes to women's rights. I am, however, debunking the idea that Islam is inherently hostile to women. Mr. Anon (talk) 04:59, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Most of the nastier attitudes to women in Islamic countries come from pre-Islamic customs rather than Islam; compare with the European witch-hunts, which drew largely on pagan beliefs even though they were justified by Christian insistence on orthodoxy. This is, I think, the reason why, of the countries on Wikipedia's list, none are culturally Arabic. 05:04, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Also you must take into account that some women actually prefer to wear a full covering in the same way that I like to wear a banned hoody when I go shopping in South Croydon shopping malls for hoodies!!. This is not an Islamic issue. Where does liberty and oppression merge? Dirk Steele (talk) 03:00, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Islamic veils in general
The term "burqa" is often used about other veils and headscarves (niqab, hijab, etc, although the difference between these is not entirely clear-cut) and the article does explain that. Is burqa now a sufficiently general noun to cover all these? Assuming the article covers all these coverings (which is sensible rather than having separate articles), is it better to keep at burqa or rename it to something more general? Some rewriting might also be good if the article is intended to cover all Islamic face and hair coverings. --Annanoon (talk) 08:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Burqa ban
The justification for the so-called "Burqa ban" is bullshit, and only a minority of Muslim women wear them anyways, most of whom probably aren't going to be terrorists. It's pure fucking Islamophobia, something that Europe in particular has a problem with. — Oxyaena Harass  18:11, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * justification for burka bans is certainly bullshit, but so is your dismissal. where is terrorism given as a justification anywhere? AMassiveGay (talk) 18:23, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Have you not seen people cite vague "security concerns" when trying to justify burqa bans? — Oxyaena Harass  19:28, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * that's not what they mean. its the same security concerns they cite when complaining about 'hoodies' and banning them from shopping centres. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:59, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * A burqa ban would make sense since there isn't one surah, which says that Muslim women should hide their faces/head. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 16:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That's irrelevant, it's still a violation of freedom of expression and is only targeted towards Muslims. Why not ban yarmelukes as well? — Oxyaena Harass  16:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * (EC)I don't see why something not being mentioned in a religious text means it should be banned. There are valid arguments for burqa ban, mostly about it being a tool of patriarchal oppression, though the arguments are mostly made by people who just want to oppress Muslims in general regardless of their sex. However, I don't think that it would make burqa any less misogynistic or patriarchal and therefore more acceptable in an egalitarian society, if Quran actually said that women should cover their entire body including the face in public. 16:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yarmalukes only cover a small part of the head, while Burqas covers the whole body. And don't forget that many Muslim women are forced by their family members to wear burqa. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 16:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Would such a ban target Nun headwear as well? Most of the same logic can be applied with ease. Also, Yarmalukes are bad counter-example. A better counter-example would be a Tichel. 17:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Nun headwear don't cover their faces. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 17:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The purpose of the Yarmulke is to let everyone else know you are openly Jewish. The same could be said about some of the headscarves such as the Hijab, but even those do have their own problems.  The Burka?  The purpose isn't just to let the world know you aren't afraid to be Muslim, but to permanently separate you from the rest of the world.  Without the ability to see your face, no one is truly able to interact with you or make a connection, or even know who you are beyond a shapeless figure under a robe.  Heck, it also means you are no longer a unique individual, but just "a woman", completely interchangeable with any other other woman. CoryUsar (talk) 17:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That's not really a good counter. All three examples have the same underlying socio-cultural motives and themes. So saying "well these other examples don't cover the face" sidesteps the issue of whether or not they are oppressive to women. 17:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Islamist fundamentalists say, Muslim women should wear it, because it's in the Quran, while there isn't one surah, which says this. Burqas really separate from the world, even from moderate Muslims. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 17:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

At the very least, it makes sense to ban burkas or other headgear that entirely or mostly covers the face when on government property. It improves security. Furthermore, it is nonsensical to allow such headgear as religious garments when ID photos or other forms of identification are taken, as it's far too difficult to use them as identification material, when only parts of the eyes are visible. IveBeenFrank (talk) 17:20, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Now we're getting somewhere in terms of an argument. 17:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I definitely agree with the ID part. But I think Hijabs that don't cover face below eyes should be allowed. It's basically goes with GC's Nun argument. Though then I'd wonder how that would be reconciled with post Covid mandatory mask laws. How would a woman wearing a hijab or Nun headwear as well as facial mask differ greatly in outward appearance from someone wearing a Niqāb for instance? 17:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Face masks prevent the spreading of Covid-19. And they look different. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 17:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ignore Covid; poor case makes poor law. If a woman goes to a bank and hands her ID, how would the teller know who they were talking to?  I could steal Maryam's purse, put on a Niqab, walk into the bank and empty her entire account.  And when she finds out that I've also stolen from her bank account, the security footage won't do jack. CoryUsar (talk) 17:44, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * (EC)I'm not arguing against face masks here. But them looking different doesn't change the fact that when worn together with hair and forehead covering headwear, they leave precious little room for identification. 17:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * In those cases where both masks and headwear are worn, secondary and tertiary identifying features are likely prioritized in the human mind. Body shape, height, voice, etc. 17:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Watch an action movie and look at all the faceless mask-covered extras that the heroes gun down. Try to determine who is whom, and if you see them alive again in a later action scene.  You won't. CoryUsar (talk) 18:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That is what's called a strawman, something you are overfond of. Most interactions do not have that level of sensory input, and as such, your example can be dismissed out of hand. Further, movies are not good counter-examples for real life. I swear to fucking god, it's like you intentionally make the most moronic arguments possible to try to piss people off. 18:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't. Walking down the street contains about the same level of sensory input, and you can instantly tell who is whom if you know them personally without having to look carefully.  In person you have more time than you would, but it takes more than a quick glance. CoryUsar (talk) 18:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you going to sit there and tell me that walking down the street and an what's portrayed in an action scene (stress, heightened emotional states, fast moving subjects, potential combat, potential fight/flight reflex) involve the same amount of sensory input? 19:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Depends on what you are doing or what's going on in the movie.
 * Walking down the street, talking to the person next to you, you give the same amount of attention to minor non-speaking characters in the calmer sections of the movie as you would a random person on the street. Cellphones are a bit different, you have to give more attention while on the phone and so you pay even less attention to everyone else around you, which is why a call while driving is much more dangerous than simply chatting with your friend in the passenger seat.
 * Running down the street because you are late for the bus, you give the same amount of attention to the everyone else around you as you would to the faceless goons in the background, only paying the occasional bit of attention as you have to dodge one or two, but everyone else might as well not exist beyond a split second flash.
 * If they are maskless, even while running, that split second may be enough to recognize someone you know or work with. If they have a mask on and not talking, you might not even recognize them even if you aren't running after the bus. CoryUsar (talk) 19:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * ":Watch an action movie and look at all the faceless mask-covered extras that the heroes gun down. Try to determine who is whom, and if you see them alive again in a later action scene.  You won't." This man, he is made of straw. I really think you should back off this point if you want to salvage your credibility, or rather what's left of it.  19:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * A completely normal and real occurrence. Outlaw trench coats now! 19:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * A completely normal and real occurrence. Outlaw trench coats now! 19:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Here's an idea: Ask a Muslim woman their thoughts on the burka. Stop homogenizing all Muslim women as being "victims of patriarchal oppression," and try to see what they themselves have to say on the subject. Reality is a lot more complicated and nuanced than A or B. — Oxyaena Harass  18:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, let me do that. Oh wait, I already have, and they all hate the Burka. CoryUsar (talk) 18:32, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, cool, give me some examples. — Oxyaena Harass  18:41, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * @Oxyaena Do you even know any muslim woman personally? I know a few and they ALL opposed the Burqa, although some of them came from Regions, where Islamist Organisations ruled. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 18:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * My hometown had a lot of Bosnian and Kurdish refugees. In high school, the teens were either born here or had moved here during the war as kids, and all wanted to be super-American.  Pro-tip; if you want your country to become hyper-Patriotic bordering on Ultra-Nationalist, allow in refugees.  None of the girls wore the Burqa and only rarely wore a Niqab, and when asked about it, it was because as I said, they wanted to live their lives as more than just some man's possession.  Later on, we did have a few immigrants who wore, well, it wasn't a Burqa but it was some other complete covering, but they were African rather than Bosniak or Kurdish, and I had been out of high school for a while by the time they arrived. CoryUsar (talk) 18:55, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware that Cory was also Oxy now. Maybe Cory should leave the conversation. Or at least not answer questions that are specifically directed at someone else. 19:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I used to be Muslim, and I knew Muslim women who wore the burqa because it was a symbol of their faith, not because "some men told them to." — Oxyaena Harass  17:28, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Then these women belong to the Salafist movement. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 20:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Citation needed. — Oxyaena Harass  20:55, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Just read the Wikipedia article on Burqa. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 12:05, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

GC, Oxy was asking Cory to give an example of Muslim women disliking burkas. Cory gave one. I don't see the issue here. Twodots (talk) 19:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I apologize, I missed that part of the exchange. 19:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries. Remember, it's the internet, and like most things in life, it's not worth getting stressed out over. CoryUsar (talk) 19:20, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * (Edit conflict...) It was a perfectly honest mistake on your part, I'm sure nobody minds. Twodots (talk) 19:21, 29 December 2020 (UTC)