The Left is conspiring with extremists in the disappearance of British women.

Her profession/job will be her choice, Oreo, if she is so qualified, and successfully navigates the selection process.

Maremia

Her profession/job will be her choice, Oreo, if she is so qualified, and successfully navigates the selection process.

But she wouldn’t successfully navigate the selection process if she was only showing eyes.That’s the point.
Sure, she could teach in a Muslim school but that’s about it.

We should emulate France on this matter and ultimately do all Muslim women a favour.

There are plenty of jobs other than teaching.

She wasn’t ‘muffled up’ - there was a thin bit of fabric over her face. Why should that ban her from any kind of profession?

It’s not something I would like to do, but then I wouldn’t want to wear a wig over my hair or have numerous children, but other religions mandate those things, and adherents can choose the degree to which they follow the mandates.

Maremia

For MT62

Turning Point USA is funded by conservative doners and includes Republican Party politicians, and promotes traditional Christian conservative worldview that prioritises marriage and motherhood over building a career.
Feels that modern feminism has harmed women.
The primary emphasis is on traditional gender roles and biblical submission.
They heavily campaign against hormonal birth control, labeling it harmful.

It's a very powerful Christian organisation.

Oh thanks, was Charlie Kirk something to do with that group?

Doodledog

There are plenty of jobs other than teaching.

She wasn’t ‘muffled up’ - there was a thin bit of fabric over her face. Why should that ban her from any kind of profession?

It’s not something I would like to do, but then I wouldn’t want to wear a wig over my hair or have numerous children, but other religions mandate those things, and adherents can choose the degree to which they follow the mandates.

That’s muffled up.
Who would employ her if she covers her face every time a man hoves into view?
Religious Jewish women who go to synagogue will wear a wig, tho am told that the wigs they wear now are more fabulous than their own hair😁and other religions do mandate other things, including Islam.That’s fine by me.
But in everyday public life women should never have to cover up completely in this country.In any case it isn’t a Muslim religious requirement but purely a cultural thing. The Quaran says that women should dress modestly is all.

I know 😀

And I'm not saying it should be mandatory, just that if someone wants to do it there is no reason they shouldn't. They should not have to, and very many Muslim women don't.

A Jewish friend of my mum used to put a tea towel over her hair to bring in the milk if she didn't have her wig on at that time in the morning. She was a widow, so no man was telling her to do it - it was her choice.

IMO that harmed nobody and I can see no reason to be troubled by it.

But your Mum’s Jewish friend wouldn’t have gone to work with a tea towel on her head and not covering her face could have worked any job she liked.
Muslim women who wear the burkha or other face coverings are usually instructed to do so by a man.
We all know it.

Or, Oreo, she may have the skills to work from home, as many professionals do, since Covid.
How she navigates the employment jungle, to suit her beliefs and practices, within the law, is really her concern.

We don't all know that Oreo. We assume that, because it doesn't sit with our practice, and because we hear about women who object to the custom.

Yes, MT62

Oreo

We should emulate France on this matter and ultimately do all Muslim women a favour.

I don’t disagree but my concern is that there are husbands/fathers/brothers that will not allow women out of the house uncovered.

Some women who wear the niqab may have been forced to do so by male members of the family but some will simply have been culturally conditioned to do this, and so believe they have chosen to do it. Choice really isn’t present when people continue to tread the same cultural paths simply because everyone in their family or community do so just as their parents and grandparents did. We are all subject to being conditioned in some way, research has shown that many people vote based not upon personal choice but by how their families and communities vote, without really being fully informed of the policies the party they vote for has or what other political parties are offering. However voters will say they chose to vote for whatever party they are conditioned to vote for. It happens culturally and societally.
So rather than liberating some of these women we would be offending them culturally.
Is very tricky to navigate this and as I said it really should be left to the fullness of time when the second generation will have to sone extent been culturally/societally conditioned by the society they now live in and probably balk at wearing the niqab.

Maremia

Not denying though are you Rosie?

Did you even read my reply of Mon 28-Sept-26 18:11:51? The one that opened with What on earth would make you ask that? Of course I'm not, and I'm amazed that's where your mind went!

For the hard of understanding I think abuse that has been perpetuated by the Churches and hidden, covered up, is vile and disgusting and deserves to be exposed and punished. I, at the same time, think merely concentrating on that narrow field does an absolute injustice to all the other victims of child sexual abuse in every other area where it has occurred. Why restrict your concern to such a narrow field, perhaps you could explain why you think this is primary and all the other abuse is secondary?

Maremia

Yes, MT62

Ahh yes thought I heard of it somewhere 👍🏻

For the sake of clarity my reply to Maremia of Mon 28-Sept-26 18:11:51 absolutely denied her outrageous and totally unfounded assumption.

Oreo

But your Mum’s Jewish friend wouldn’t have gone to work with a tea towel on her head and not covering her face could have worked any job she liked.
Muslim women who wear the burkha or other face coverings are usually instructed to do so by a man.
We all know it.

No, she wore a wig outside of the house, and indoors if people were visiting.

My point, as I'm sure you are aware, is that she was doing so from choice, not because she was told to. Yes, it will have been tradition/culture/religion that drove her wish to cover her hair, but it wasn't a 'Jewish area', so nobody from her community would see her bringing in the milk - she just didn't think it was proper for a man other than her late husband to see her natural hair.

She worked as a teacher in a RC school, so I assume that means that she wasn't as Orthodox as some. I suppose an equivalent would be that I wouldn't go out with a very low neckline, or in my nightwear. There is no law against it, but I would feel uncomfortable, and I assume the neighbours would talk, which I wouldn't want to happen. Culture and tradition.

How do you know that Muslims who cover up are usually instructed by a man? As I've said, I knew one young woman who covered her hair when it needed a wash or if it wasn't looking as good as it might. No men involved.

I'm not denying the fact that there will be some women who have no choice but to do all sorts of things, wearing burkhas included. But that is true of women from all faiths and none. some men are bullies, and some women are dependent on them - sad, but true.

I would rather we made it clear to all oppressed women that there is an alternative, but the reality is that if they can't speak English well and/or rarely leave small, close-knit communities they will be difficult to reach, and alternatives may be difficult to find. Maybe politicians and other people with connections to outside agencies befriending them is a good start?

I don't have the answers, but I think that barging in with 'banning' things that are important to people is very rarely the way forward.

I can in part agree Doodledog but can you really think the women in Afghanistan are complicit through free choice? I know that's not the UK but I struggle with the idea women in the UK are happy and choose to totally conceal their entire bodies while thinking the males of any age should be free to dress in western clothing. IMO there has to be a degree of conditioning to marry such diverse options.

No, I agree absolutely that Afghan women are treated terribly. The difference though, is that the law colludes with their oppression, whereas here it does not.

Afghan women have no choice but to defer to men and to live horribly restricted lives. Here there will be obstacles (many seemingly insurmountable) to freedom for women caught in cultural oppression, but that freedom is there.

What the government/law/system needs to do is to make the steps out of that clear, and assist those who want to take them. Of course there will be complaints about money being spent on ‘foreigners’, particularly Muslims, but IMO help is so much better than trying to ban others’ ways of life.

As in France, if the government ban face coverings, and I think any head covering for children in school ( could be wrong on that) then all Muslim households in the country just have to obey it and will then soon come to accept it. France says it will help to integrate into French society better and of course in the end empower all women.
We could do that here but the government would have to be brave and realise they would lose some votes.

Oreo

As in France, if the government ban face coverings, and I think any head covering for children in school ( could be wrong on that) then all Muslim households in the country just have to obey it and will then soon come to accept it. France says it will help to integrate into French society better and of course in the end empower all women.
We could do that here but the government would have to be brave and realise they would lose some votes.

I have no issue in helping any oppressed woman, in any culture, n any circumstances.

I’m not fond of outright bans on anything, which is lawful and safe.

Should we take this one step further and ban the wearing crucifixes in our schools?

I understand that there are other cultures and faiths who choose to cover their heads with headscarfs, should these be banned?

In all European countries with this ban, it covers only public places.

Surely this could actually mean women who are coerced or forced to wear full face coverings will also be forced to stay inside the home, much like a prisoner?

When did I say that Rosie?

I think banning is tricky but the problem is that this just doesn't impact the women who choose to wear it, and 'choice' is also often an interesting concept. It helps to reinforce misogyny as acceptable and this impacts both those who are forced to wear it but also those, particularly young girls, who have to witness this 'approved' misogyny.

Cossy

Oreo

As in France, if the government ban face coverings, and I think any head covering for children in school ( could be wrong on that) then all Muslim households in the country just have to obey it and will then soon come to accept it. France says it will help to integrate into French society better and of course in the end empower all women.
We could do that here but the government would have to be brave and realise they would lose some votes.

I have no issue in helping any oppressed woman, in any culture, n any circumstances.

I’m not fond of outright bans on anything, which is lawful and safe.

Should we take this one step further and ban the wearing crucifixes in our schools?

I understand that there are other cultures and faiths who choose to cover their heads with headscarfs, should these be banned?

Wearing religious jewellery is a matter for schools, but doesn’t cover the face or the head.
It’s France that bans headscarves in schools.I wouldn’t go that far but simply ban burqas and niqabs.
The face must be seen.
To those who don’t like the idea of a ban such as other European countries have done, it’s alright, it won’t happen as politicians are scared of annoying ethnic minorities, in particular….men.