Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Should the burqa be banned essay
Not banning the burqa in australia essay
Should the burqa be banned
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Should the burqa be banned essay
The burka, should it be banned or not? The 'burka' is a garment for women to cover the whole of their body, from head to toe, with a mesh cloth over the eyes and it is worn by Muslim women out in public. This is a controversial garment as a lot of Britain’s think we should be banning the burka-like our European neighbours such as France, Belgium and the Netherland’s. Some would argue that the burka is a danger to the public and would like to see this item of clothing banned. Others, however, see the criminalisation of the burka offensive and believe Muslim women should be able to wear what they please.
Perhaps the strongest argument for banning the burka is security reasons. There have been many successful security breaches where people have
…show more content…
This shows that wearing a burka in court provides some serious risks and allows questions to arise, questioning the authenticity of the person standing before them.
Many would argue that when you stand in court and swear an oath, you are swearing to be your true self and nothing but the truth. But how could these women be their true selves in front of a court and jury if they cannot wear the one garment that symbolises them the most? By taking away the traditional clothing of these women, we cannot expect them to be their true selves in courtrooms due to the fact they will be missing the garment that expresses them the most.
Correspondingly, many who oppose the burka would argue that they do so because it is an item of oppression. It is argued that the burka is a garment that reinforces the inferior status of women. For them, it is a concern these women will be controlled by the men and that it lowers the dignity and equality of the women in burkas. It is further argued that the burka reverses some of the breakthroughs that women as a whole have had in the previous decades determining the role us females have in today’s
...th her point of view. Dr. Hargey also pokes fun at Muslims by insinuating that clearly-thing Muslims will not oppose the ban. Another example of ethos is the passage first cited as a logical appeal—the statement that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” This passage, while mostly a logos appeal, subtly boosts Chesler’s credibility because practicing Muslim men and women recognize the burqas and niqabs are not required by the Koran. Because these men and women, simultaneously educated and religious, acknowledge that burqas are optional, readers can begin to support the argument, too, as it comes from reputable sources.
Should Britain and other Western countries follow the Belgian and French examples and ban the burqa and the niqab? In other words, should the West prohibit any and all clothing that conceals one's identity? According to some surveys, most Europeans seem to expect the ban of burqa and niqab ("Widespread Support for Banning Full Islamic Veil in Western Europe"). However, a significant part of society, particularly in the United States and quite a few feminists have considered such a ban as religiously intolerant, anti-Western and primarily anti-woman. They maintain that the state has no right to decide what a woman can and cannot wear—it is her body, not public property; that given the worldwide exploitation of women as pornographic sex objects, wearing loose, comfortable, modest clothing, or actually covering up, might be both convenient and more dignified; that because of the West's tolerance toward religions, the state cannot come between a woman and her conscience because it would be a betrayal of Western values; and that women are freely choosing to wear the burqa. Some Western intellectuals, such as Leon Wieseltier,
For some women wearing a veil is not something that is forced on them but rather a choice of their own. Martha Nussbaum and Maysan Haydar are both authors that try to explain their reasoning that veiling isn't an oppressive tool used against women. Martha Nussbaum's article “Veiled Threats”, is a political and philosophical take on why banning the burqa is a violation of human rights. On the other hand Maysan Haydar’s article “Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering”, is a more humorous and personal take on why veiling shouldn't be as judged or stereotyped. Though Nussbaum and Haydar have equal goals this essay is being used to understand the main argument, claims and whether or not each article has any weaknesses.
Voltaire’s objections to the state imposed religion of 18th century France would hold true for the militant secularism of today. Toleration is foundational to a healthy society- “tolerance has never provoked a civil war; intolerance has covered the Earth in carnage” (Treatise on Tolerance). Banning the veil, like all attempts to create a more homogenous society, is doomed to fail. Any ban encourages Islamophobia and feeds extremism by stigmatizing Muslims. Instead we must “focus on the creation of mechanisms designed to help women escape subjugation and domestic abuse, leave oppressive family structures without the fear of violent reprisals, as well as equip them with tools to better integrate within society and ensure their autonomy” (National Secular Society). Banning the veil is ultimately more of a threat to society than the veil itself. The future stability of Europe hangs in the
Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving by Lila Abu-Lughod describes Western feminist beliefs on Muslim women and their burqa/veil and how focusing on these misconceptions are doing far more harm than good. This causes Western feminists reduce the culture and beliefs of Muslim women down to a single piece of clothing. The burqa is a type of veil worn by Muslim women for a number of reasons such as proprietary and signaling their relationship with God. The burqa is often seen a symbol of suppression amongst the Western world and it was expected for women to throw it off in a show of independence once liberated from the Taliban. The saving of Muslim women is often used to justify the “War on Terrorism” as exemplified in Laura Bush 's 2001 speech. The belief that Muslim women needed saving existed before the “War on Terrorism” as seen when Marnia Lazreg wrote about a skit where two Afghan girls talked about the beauty of the free Christian France.
The creation and enforcement of the burqa comes from a combination of a misinterpretation of the Koran and influences from the Pushtun residents of the country. The Koran has a brief passage that describes that women should abide by decent codes of conduct and their bosoms and private parts should be veiled (Goodson). In Pushtun societies women have a lesser role and lead more sheltered lives, but they were still respected (Goodson). So women had a very restrictive dress code that included wearing veils that covered almost their entire body till the late 1950’s, but it should be noted that they were treated with a lot more respect and equality than during the Taliban regime (Schulz).
The hijab, while not always popular, has seem to be customary for most women to wear in the Islam world for good or for bad. Prior to the 21st century the hijab was not very popular and was looked as a rarity, but now most women adopted this clothing choice for a multitude of reasons. Many women choose to wear it because they feel god instructed women to wear it, to highlight modesty, to show faith in god, or to show Muslim identity. There are many reasons women wear the hijab, even if the veil is forced upon them because of family members; However, the sight of the veil concerns many women activists whose main priority is to insure equality for all women. Many women activists don’t like the veil to be forced upon women and the idea
The author of this essay thinks it is ridiculous that women cannot wear their hijab in certain places around the world. Many people think the hijab is not necessary. However, it is part of what Muslim women believe. She explains in her essay, "So next time you hear about a hijab ban think about your best pair of jeans or your faded t-shirt with the logo of your favorite band" (Fakhraie 461). A hijab is just like every other piece of clothing that covers up the body. It can be part of their religion, or they can wear a hijab just because they like how it
In this excerpt, the burqa is described as “tight”, “heavy”, and “suffocating”, making it seem like an unpleasant garment to be ensconced in. The burqa can cause an “unnerving” feeling, which can make daily tasks hard to complete. When interviewing a girl in Afghanistan, Daniel Pipes, American historian, writer, and commentator, got her opinion on the burqa, “When I wear a burqa it gives me a really bad feeling. I don't like to wear it. I don't like it, it upsets me, I can't breathe properly.”
Women have always been thought of as something that needed to be controlled in Muslim culture. Their bodies are a source of shame that must be covered during prayer and also in the public (Mir-Hosseini 2007: 3). Veiling, done by a hijab or chador, is when women either wear a headscarf to cover themselves or they wear a veil that covers their entire body, excluding her hands and eyes (Mir-Hosseini 2007: 1; Mir-Hosseini 2003: 41; Berger 1998: 93; Smith-Hefner 2007: 390-391; Brenner 1996: 674; El Guindi 1999: 6). Veiling is used as a tool for oppression. By having women veil themselves, it enforces the control by the male run and male dominated society (Mir-Hosseini 2007: 7). Also, the punishment for women appearing without a veil transitioned as the concept of veiling was addressed, transitioning from seventy-four lashes, to being arrested and held between ten days and two months for being “immodest” women and offending public morality, or fined 50,000 to 500,000 rials (Mir-Hosseini 2007: 8). The oppression of veiling is perpetuated through the thought that it is a woman’s religious duty to wear one, condemning foreigners and women in society if they refuse. Although it is a tool for oppression, there was resistance the oppression. In ...
International human rights standards protect the rights of persons to be able to choose what they wish to wear, and in particular to be able to manifest their religious belief. Thus, Human Rights Watch in their report, focusing on the hijab ban for state officials in Germany, said that: “Restrictions should only be implemented where fully justified by the state, and be the least restrictive necessary”.1 Proclamation of wearing the hijab in public institutions as illegal is undermining the autonomy of individuals, their right to choose, their right to privacy and intimacy, and their self-determination. In addition to this, several European countries such as Germany and France directly prevent women wearing hijab to work or attend school in the public state institutions, which further intensified already negative attitude of Western public towards wearing hijab.
Hijab is a choice that some women or girls make for their own security, for more privacy, or because it makes them feel comfortable and confident about themselves. It should be a choice though, and as it is not proven to us that it is obligatory, countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan should remove their laws that insist every girl puts the veil on. Freedom of choice should be given in these countries. It is not required in Islam so it shouldn’t be forced on anyone anywhere. In addition to this, Islam’s beauty is it’s freedom, the choice it provides you with, let it not be ruined.
299). The study consisted of having in-depth personal interviews to share their experiences of being a Muslim American woman (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 300). Veiling to these women was a way of freedom while also having a Muslim identity (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 301). It was also a source of behavior control, to not be sexually objectified, a way of commanding respect from others and even a source of checking their own behavior (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 301). One of the women interviewed said, veiling to her was a way to feel connected to other Muslim woman who veil (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 302). Veiling can be a way to feel connected to your religion and God as well as being connected to those who practice the same faith, it can be considered an act of membership. Many of the women interviewed noted they have been removed from planes, been treated unfairly, and have had strangers shout at them all for just being Muslim and being more visibly recognized from veiling (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 303). This is an example of how media can affect the general population. When the media only shows radicals and compares all Muslims to being terrorist or dangerous they are actually putting Muslim people at risk of being assaulted in public. Muslim woman in particular are more at risk for being assaulted as they are more identifiable. So while veiling can be a source of empowerment and freedom for women it is a double-edged sword because it also puts them at further risk of being
The hijab is a very important and powerful Muslim symbol that is worn by billions of Muslim women all over the world. Many wear the hijab as a symbol of faith, while others wear it to protect themselves from society’s expectations of women. Some people think that banning the use of the hijab in public is a violation of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. However, others think the banning of the hijab is a necessary precaution. The wearing of the Muslim hijab should be banned in public because it is impractical, Muslims use it to separate themselves from society, and it is a security risk.
Democratic people with their beliefs, as they stick to freedom of religion, definitely, should not support this action. The banning of headscarves is directly targeting a section of women and forcing them to expose part of their bodies, which is against their will. Security issues are really important to any country, but there are other ways that should be done instead of just banning the headscarves. For example, a government can use security doors in public institutions that can detect any metal. There are already a lot of these doors used in many places like airports and some malls for security reasons. Also a government can use a lady police to check the identity of women wearing burqas. It is a shameful act in modern countries and modern civilization, and should be condemned by all democrats and human rights organizations.