Does anyone like or support face-covering (hijab or burka)??

Face language is as important as speaking, so I don't like face-coverings except for protection from the elements. It saddens me to think that women are forced to wear burkas. It also saddens me that some women choose to wear burkas. I hope the custom will die out as education improves attitudes and cultural practices change to more openness and more freedom.

Headscarves – no problem. I wear Buffs quite often which, depending how you arrange them, can look similar to some 'moslem' head coverings. I wear them for warmth and to keep my hair out of my eyes. Headscarves are just hats really. Most people don't wear hats/bonnets/caps indoors nowadays, but at one time lots of people did.

I guess a burkha is a desirable item of clothing in an Afghanistani sandstorm! In other climates and places it seems daft to me. But then, most religious or cultural nuttery irks me.

I'll be honest - I don't like to come across someone with their face obscured, whether by a niqab, burkha or motorbike helmet. There seems to be something bad mannered about it. I read about a niqab-wearing woman getting a job as a home care visitor, and frightening a frail aged client almost to death.

As for the hijab - no problem - it is just a head scarf after all.

Perhaps one day there will be a Muslim Enlightenment, and things will change.

Being deaf in a burka-wearing society must be especially difficult – no lip-reading. Maybe the people who have to wear burkas aren't supposed to speak much anyway

I don't like burkhas or hijabs. I think it inhibits the women from integrating into the society in which they are living. In their own countries, that their society, so no problem. But in a western society (where they chose to live) then I think such clothing has no place. I have no objection to headscarves.

I agree it can also cause a problem with identification for whatever reason.

And it can look very scary for very old people or young children.

It's my opinion when you chose to live in a country then you should follow the customs and in the western world, it is not the custom to cover your face. If I lived in, say, Saudi Arabia, then I would be expected to cover my face and I would follow the custom. I can't see what the problem is. As some one said 'when in Rome....'

Isthisallthereis I am a little confused. In a previous post you say you don't have grandchildren although your SO does. You were annoyed when someone later erroneously referred to you having grandchildren I seem to remember.

But now you say you don't want your grandchildren growing up seeing women hiding their faces in public.

So that's a bit of a mystery, ain't it?

Or have I completely got the wrong end of the stick?

Gut reaction to women with covered faces is I don't like it. Communication relies heavily on facial expressions so I would feel at a disadvantage trying to communicate with someone whose face I could not see.

On an intellectual level, I wouldn't be prepared to ban the burka or whatever.

janthea, a discussion point – I wonder how many of the women who continue to wear the burka in Western countries 'chose' to live there? Thinking: arranged marriages.

I found it disconcerting even to hold a conversation with someone who is wearing sunglasses. So much is conveyed by the eyes and by non-verbal communication, as is shown by the misunderstandings on this forum. The hijab is OK and it is very like a nun's headdress or a headsquare, but the burqa is so totally anonymous that it hinders any connection with the person inside it.

Then there is the question of identification at the bank, passport control, and so on.

What I find truly worrying about the burka is the political message behind it. In many countries/ cultures women are forced to wear it and would suffer severe penalties if they failed to do so. In the west, it is a fairly recent phenomenon adopted by women themselves because they wish to make a public statement about their religion/ culture which they feel is under attack. Also worrying, and we need to look at the reasons they feel this way. I personally feel concerned that their chosen way of defending their culture is to adopt a way of dress designed to subjugate women. In either case the rationale is that women need to be covered because men are too weak to withstand the lure of a woman's sexuality. Insulting to both sexes I think.

Well said, nightowl.
There was a thing I saw on Twitter recently, where a Canadian (I think) girl and her friend went out wearing moslem headscarves, not face-coverings, just the headscarves worn the way many moslem women wear them. They were shocked at the differences in the way people related to them. It was as if a barrier had been put up. They blamed this on prejudice. I'm not sure it's quite as simple as that, for the reasons nightowl gives – the subliminal messages are not good.

bags Good point. I presume, then, their husbands/family have chosen to live here because they want to. So I think my point still stands that if you want to live in a country, then integrate and observe customs - no face coverings! If you don't like our customs/culture, then why do you live here?

Have recently (had horrible cold - that is my excuse) been watching daytime television. Helicopter Heroes the other day showed a young patient being taken to A and E with very serious injuries. The consultant was wearing a brightly coloured headscarf and I wondered about infection etc. You would think there would be headscarves to match the scrubs they wear which could be laundered by the hospital. I am sure she did not change her scarf between patients though had a plastic apron over the rest of her body. With all the talk of hospital acquired infections it did make me wonder about the rules. Does religious freedom overrule infection control?

Yes, it seems it does wisewoman, or at least that the 'rules' may be bent to accommodate certain religious practises.
Exposure of the forearms is not acceptable to some staff because of their Islamic faith. Therefore NICE guidance accommodates this by stating that uniforms may include provision for sleeves that can be full length when staff are not engaged in direct patient care activity, uniforms can have three-quarter length sleeves, but that any full or three-quarter length sleeves must not be loose or dangling. Sleeves must be able to be rolled or pulled back and kept securely in place during hand washing and direct patient care activity. Also, disposable over-sleeves, elasticated at the elbow and wrist, may be used but must be put on and discarded in exactly the same way as disposable gloves.
So, it seems that the NHS will pay for over-sleeves in order to accommodate muslims. This is in the face of research that says that infection control is improved when forearms are bared.

I am mystified by the argument that covering the face is a barrier to conversation. Blind people hold conversations all the time . And the rest of us regularly have perfectly normal conversations over the telephone.
I think if people start arguing "when in Rome" they are on shaky ground. Where do you draw the line? Have the French got it right? I don't think the state of their race relations would indicate that they have.

I remember years ago being told by a nurse that they had to wear skirts, not trousers, 'because of the danger of infection'. The skirt could be a problem with all the bending and stretching over beds etc. She said when they asked how that applied to female nurses but not to males, they didn't get a satisfactory answer. When women from cultures where trousers are normally worn by women started to come into nursing, skirts were no longer insisted on. Same with school uniform, police uniform and every other female uniform. Hurrah for the benefits of diversity!

Valid point about blind people and telephone conversations, jess. But I still like to see a face when there is no barrier except one imposed by distance or disability as, I think, do most people. And other primates. Given that the face covering is, as I understand it (may be wrong), and imposed cultural barrier rather than what might be called a 'natural' one, I think there is room for regarding them as very different.

There, lots of argument material

If men wore burkas as well, I would not feel I could argue against them (well, not so easily). It's the gender difference that makes it an issue.

I totally agree bags. And at the risk of sounding completely non PC I would go so far as to say I have some sympathy with banning face coverings. I equate it with banning the oppression of women. Sometimes the law needs to dictate attitudes rather than wait for attitudes to change. There, I've really put the cat amongst the pigeons now!

Bags How do you know that men aren't wearing burkas?

nightowl Do you also have some sympathy with the banning of, say, bikinis because women seem to be sexual objects when wearing them?

I don't know for certain, absent, any more than I know for certain that a black sheep in the field is also black on its other side. I think some men have worn/do wear burkas for hiding purposes, but I've never heard of a man being in trouble from a woman for not wearing one. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen of course, BUT....

You don't hear men speaking out and saying "We wear them too!" either. And if you see a crowd in a burka-wearing area of the world, it tends to be all recognisably male or, if mixed, with 'covered' women .

Historically speaking, how many men's working outfits have been impractical? And how many women's, just for comparison.

Get real!

No absent I don't support the banning of bikinis because when I was part of the fight many moons ago that said 'women can wear what they like, our bodies are our own and not the property of men' I accepted that women could go stark naked if they wanted to. I don't like some of the results, the 'slut walks' for example and topless modelling but I have to accept it. I think face coverings are the complete opposite of everything we stood up for (grammar - sorry) and a return to the attitudes that men can define what women should be.

I did say I have some sympathy for the banning of face coverings because I know it is a highly complex issue.

I have ^some* sympathy for it too and I have mixed feelings about the French ban. On the one had I agree with the "let people wear what they like" argument but on the other hand I accept that, in fact, we can very rarely wear just what we like. We do actually have to conform to certain usually unwritten 'rules'. A bikini is allright in some places or circumstances but certainly not all. Similarly, a burka-type garment may be OK in some circumstances, but not all. One of those "not alls" is Western 'making-some-attempt-to-be-gender-equal' Society. There's no hiding from the fact that most of the time, the burka is a symbol of female repression. It's also a religious repression. Neither of those repressions is welcome, nor should be, in a civilised society. And no, I don't think all cultures are equal.

Do the women who were the different coverings feel repressed or do they feel released from the pressure of being judged by how they look?

If we argue that someone should have the right not to wear something then equally we must allow that others will want to wear something that we maybe don't approve of.

I accept your argument vampirequeen but I absolutely cannot agree that the only way a woman can be taken on her own merits is by covering her face. Women are not the problem here.