We pride ourselves on being a tolerant nation, but....

trisher - I am talking about boys as well as girls. The principle is the same. It is a religious/cultural practice that involves cutting off part of a baby where there is no medical indication. It is happening around us all the time. We tolerate it because speaking out is seen as being intolerant of another's beliefs.

I think it is intolerant of a child's rights.

It does seem to be rather a strange condition to apply when considering whether or not someone is suitable for citizenship. Perhaps there is more to it than has been reported or perhaps the media are making something out of nothing.

as my son would say dont sweat the small stuff ,theres a huge difference between a custom ie. shaking hands and a vile practice FGM .By all means stand back if /when someone doesn't want to shake hands or wants the choice to wear/not wear a veil but standing back and allowing FGM is the same as condoning it and thats something we cant do .Customs and cruelty are worlds apart

Luckygirl sorry we can (and should) protest about the mutilation of children, whatever the reason behind it. Tolerance does not mean abandoning all principles and giving everyone carte blanche to do as they wish. It means examining carefully what is being done, considering how important it is and accepting that individuals have the right to practice their religion as long as when doing so they do not harm anyone or subject others to pain and discomfort.

I do think that it is up to each country to make their own decision about what their citizenship conditions are.

Some countries may make conditions that we do not like; but it is their right.

We may dislike the rules (or one in particular) that France have made, but we cannot condemn them; or we must also condemn other countries whose rules we wish to appear to accept on the grounds of wishing to appear tolerant.

We are in a real tangle about tolerance/racism/religion - and that does not surprise me. It is a complex issue. It really is not as simple as some represent it - limitless tolerance results, for instance, in babies being mutilated on our own doorstep. We do not speak out because it seems intolerant and we do not want to offend.

How to uphold the principle of tolerance whilst also protecting the vulnerable and caring about the principles we hold dear, for very good reasons?

Alexa
It is actually the second and third generation Muslims who have adopted the dress and social practices. These are not illiterate country folk but raised and educated within the UK. The first generation arrivals have maintained the dress of their country of origin. No face cover, and a sheer scarf either thrown over the shoulder or draped lightly over the head.

By coincidence this popped up on my Newsfeed today:

metro.co.uk/2018/04/27/self-confessed-drunk-man-tells-passenger-drinking-beer-abide-english-laws-get-7503470/

How hard it is - I know that if I took the decision to become a citizen of another nation, I would do my utmost to absorb and observe their customs, and learn their language. Presumably if I did not approve of their customs I would not have chosen to live there

I agree with that statement Luckygirl - and it is noticeable that many British ex-pats have come under fire (not least on here) by living in their own 'communities' and not bothering to learn the language of the host country or their customs.

If we are to become more tolerant then perhaps taking more steps towards learning the customs of a country where we choose to live would be appropriate - unless we wish to live in an enclosed community within that country and not to integrate at all.

When some of my family became citizens of another country they had to swear an allegiance and even to promise to defend their new country in times of war.

Eloethan you have no idea what the true situation actually was, and neither do I.
I have read ( before now) that all that will take place at the ceremony is explained beforehand to any new citizen.
All we can do is speculate what people would do.If it had been explained about handshakes of congratulation, then gloves could be worn.If anyone simply cannot shake hands, gloves on or not, then it would have to be made known beforehand and it would be up to the laws of that country surrounding citizenship, to decide if it was acceptable or not.
I do think that any country good enough to allow you to become a citizen there with all the rights it confers, may set it’s own rules.

Joelsnan wrote:

"Wherever I have lived I have complied with required customs and etiquette. Even if visiting a different country I have usually pre-researched the same so as not to offend."

That was your privilege as a free educated woman . Many Muslims in the UK come from rural villages and those religious observances yield only to quite expensive education which frees the younger emigre generations from fundamentalism.

Trisher Your post 11:20:52
Yes, I am against intolerance and extremism
As mentioned before I have lived and worked many years abroad until 2015 I lived very happily in a Muslim country. The multi national expat community was larger than the local. There was every faith (apart from Jews) and culture. There were discrete churches, Temples etc. Outward display of any other religion than Islam were prohibited except for Christmas which was fabulous in terms of festivities and glitz. Jesus is a prophet so they see no problem in celebrating.
All communities lived in harmony because the local population dictated how everyone should behave and the expats obeyed or were imprisoned or sent home. Knowing the boundaries led to social cohesion. There were some difficult quirks but that was how it was.
Extremism within their own faith was quickly stamped on. The covert intelligence was very efficient and effective. Although traditionally many local women covered their faces many employers stipulated that they would not be employed if they were not prepared to uncovered their faces. Additionally within the workplace only the national dress of the locals or business dress could be worn, no saris, shalwar khamese etc.
There was great respect from the expat community for this country and its rulers and knowing and respecting the boundaries led to a great multinational experience for many and a deeper understanding of differing cultures and faiths.

Pogs you may like to look at this map www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/pew-global-religious-restrictions_us_58ed070be4b0ca64d919ab12
the UK is low, France is high and Russia is the highest.

Not sure France is second only to Russia in the number of restrictions it imposes.

Switzerland has imposed a ban on building minarets, the burka ban/partial face covering ban is upheld in many countries such as Belgium, the Netherlands Germany.

I mentioned the hand shake scenario in Switzerland .

Joelsan once again your post could be interpreted as being against those who preach intolerance. They are the bullies in the playground determined that everyone must play the game their way. I do not support extreme interpretations of any religious belief. I do think an individual should be allowed to practice their religion as they choose as long as it is not imposing or interfering with the lives of others. France has a long history of restricting religious practices and in Europe is second only to Russia in the number of restrictions it imposes.

Wherever I have lived I have complied with required customs and etiquette. Even if visiting a different country I have usually pre-researched the same so as not to offend.

When I worked in Thailand I greeted people in the Thai way. It would never have occurred to me to refuse because it wasn't part of my culture, religious or otherwise.

It was only a handshake' could easily be 'it was only a small push or rebuff',

Seriously?!

What many 'Liberals' fail to recognise when supporting extreme interpretation of custom or religion is that they are effectively supporting the 'bullies in the playground'. They are the ones who ignore or dismiss those with these tendencies. The bullies develop a growing gang until they control the playground.
We frown on school or workplace bullies yet if anyone attaches custom or relgion to their actions then it become 'aaah but'.
'It was only a handshake' could easily be 'it was only a small push or rebuff',

Did you know there was a case of 2 Syrian school boys in Switzerland who refused to shake the hand of female teachers ?

Apparently it is custom in Switzerland to shake the hand of your teachers at the beginning and end of the school day.

The outcome is they must shake female teachers hands or they will face fines of 5,000CHF (£4,000) .

www.thelocal.ch/20160525/basel-muslim-schoolboys-must-shake-hands-or-face-fine

In a statement, the department of education, culture and sport in Basel-Country said:

“The public interest with respect to equality between men and women and the integration of foreigners significantly outweighs the freedom of conscience (freedom of religion) of the students.”

Refusing to shake hands on religious grounds would be to involve others in a “religious act” and is therefore different from the wearing of a headscarf or refusing to take part in swimming lessons, it said.

“The social gesture of a handshake is important for the employability of the students later in their professional lives,” it added.

Day6 wrote:

"This woman was making a stand for her religion, which imo was totally unreasonable given the circumstances. "

Islam as interpreted by many Muslims IS an unreasonable religion. Any authoritarian fundamentalist religion is by definition unreasoning on the part of its faithful servants.

I read in The Guardian only this morning that it was a group of fundamentalist Roman Catholics who imposed their faith upon Alfie Evans's suffering parents.

Refusing to shake hands is trivial compared with a lot of what religious fundies do. I'm what most people would call atheist but when I visited a mosque I was happy to cover my head with my prettiest and most suitable Paisley patterned stole thing and remove my shoes in the foyer.

Since most people in the UK are sort of atheists, agnostics, or conventional religionists it's up to that sort of person to accommodate those who are unable to widen their religious horizons. Within the law ,of course.

Eleoethan, an excellent post. Customs come and customs go. As you state it is not a criminal offence not to shake hands and, last time I looked, you are not required to touch another person physically unless you choose to do so. Even a doctor must ask permission. I enjoyed several years of visiting this headteacher's school and neither of us had a problem with the lack of physical contact. It did not stop him running a very good exam centre and it did not stop me doing my inspection with the thoroughness required. Perhaps at these formal ceremonies such as the citizenship one, one should have to fill in on the form whether you want the physical contact of the handshake or a simple respectful bow to one another. It would certainly save on court costs.

I do not like many of the practices of various religions, especially as I believe most - if not all - religions are divisive, male-dominated and, to varying degrees, treat women as lesser beings who are only capable of performing certain roles.

However, my feeling is that you do not create a more cohesive society by continually criticising the cultural or religious practices of certain groups, whilst accepting similar practices of other groups. In my opinion, such negativity and occasional barely concealed dislike only serves to make people feel under attack and so less likely to mix with, and be influenced by, wider society.

lemongrove You say

"If a Jewish Rabbi was seeking citizenship, and was told the official was female, he could have explained beforehand and it wouldn't have been a problem."

As far as I am aware, this woman was not told beforehand that it was compulsory for her to shake hands with a man, indeed that it was a prerequisite of being granted citizenship.

Are you saying that a Jewish Rabbi, having been told that he would be expected to shake hands with a woman in order to gain citizenship, would just go ahead and comply?

Or does your statement that, if he was informed beforehand of this expectation, "it wouldn't be a problem", mean that, in order to respect his wishes, no hand would be proferred?

I think most people expect the laws of the land to be upheld, and illegal practices, such as FGM (though sadly not male circumcision), threatening or racist behaviour, etc. etc., to be prosecuted, but deciding not to shake hands is not a criminal offence.

Day 6 France is not a 'Non Muslim' country. It is a secular country which prohibits religious observance of any kind in schools and public institutions.

The United Kingdom is not a secular country. In England there is an established Church, whose head is the Sovereign and whose unelected Bishops sit in Parliament by virtue of religious office. Most schools still have religious observance, eg praying and singing hymns in assemblies. Faith Schools are permitted. All state occasions have involvement of the clergy. The National Anthem is a hymn. I refuse to sing it as it would be totally hypocritical because I believe in neither GOD nor the divine right of Kings.

As a Scot, I remember that the wearing of tartan was proscribed, the use of Gaelic was banned and we were belted in school for using Scots words or grammar, taught no Scottish History. and studied Shakespeare but not Burns or Scott. Thankfully, we live in more enlightened times now. However, I would dispute that there is a standard British set of customs and social mores across the 4 Nations and the regions within them, which comprise the United Kingdom, let alone among the many Britons who have made their homes here and quite understandably wish to maintain some of the culture of the land of their, or their parent's birth.

I have never heard of anyone cutting a goat's throat in their back garden (though I have heard of people wringing hen's necks and shooting deer and grouse for sport) but I assume you have Day6 or you wouldn't make such a scurrilous comment.

Ah I see Day6 you want us to apply laws and restrictions like those found in Islamic countries. Personally I would hope that we are better than that and that we uphold always the principle of the right to withdraw from an activity which conflicts with our religious beliefs. It's based in a long history of non-conformism and the right to withdraw from organised religious activity and it has served us well.

Shaking hands is an established way of greeting all over the world and certainly in European countries. Someone wanting to live in Europe should be aware of this perhaps?

There are conditions and restrictions to citizenship, and rejecting the hand of friendship (which many deem insulting - look at what happened to Obama and the furore it caused) is likely to be frowned upon. It is offensive to western culture to reject a hand that has been offered to you. Offending local officials isn't clever. This may have been a genuine act of faith, but a French citizen would know it is offensive, and she had been living in France for a while.

Would any of us offend the norms of Islamic middle eastern countries? Would it be wise for a gay couple to hold hands in the streets of Pakistan? Prison awaits if you offend, so it's a matter of choosing your battles.

This woman also discriminated between a male and a female. She treats men and women differently. Her reason why she won't shake hands with a man is sexist and from a less enlightened ideology. In that respect she is culturally incompatible too. France is a non-Muslim country.

She is playing the victim but she has to accept that her actions caused offence too. Her rejection was just as upsetting to the onlookers who witnessed it. To not appreciate a common greeting as the cultural norm makes one wonder why she wants to reside in France. Does she expect everyone to acquiesce to her demands and beliefs at the expense of their own? Does France - an extremely patriotic and nationalistic country - have any obligation to welcome people who do not want to assimilate? Isn't mutual respect at the heart of this?

Would you expect to be welcomed in Iran if you wore a bikini on a scorching hot day when it was uncomfortable for you, with your western ways, to wear clothes? You just wouldn't do it.

You'd adjust to the acceptable norm and hide your flesh.