Tunisia Islamists storm university over veil ban

[Bosonic]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - Islamists stormed a university in Tunisia Saturday after it refused to enrol a woman wearing a full-face veil, a staff member said, highlighting tensions over religion that are likely to dominate an election later this month.

Tunisia votes on October 23 in the first election since a revolution that inspired the "Arab Spring" uprisings. The vote has pitted Islamists against secular Tunisians who say their liberal values are under threat.

"The General Secretary of the university was attacked this morning with extreme violence by a group of religious extremists," said Moncef Abdul Jalil, a faculty head at the university of Sousse, about 150 km south of the Tunisian capital.

About 200 people protested outside the faculty, and then stormed the building carrying banners demanding students' right to wear a veil, Abdul Jalil was quoted as saying by Tunisia's official TAP news agency.

Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/10/08/uk-tunisia-protest-veil-idUKTRE79722J20111008

[ZombieHorde]

1. Veil bans are misogynistic in nature. Women don't need to be told what to wear.

I understand there are controlling husbands who force their wives to dress a certain way, but this is not limited to just veils, or Islam.

[riderinthestorm]

4. Google images shows only MEN storming the university...

gee, wonder why that is.... :eyes:

Full face veils are the misogynistic item here. They are designed to erase women from society and render them as virtual ghosts. I have no problem legislating against anything that so effectively works against women's empowerment. Clothing laws are inherent in virtually all societies so I have no problem with creating laws banning this type of CULTURAL (not religiously required) costuming that works to eradicate women as equal partners in the public square.

[ZombieHorde]

5. Do you have any evidence the veil is for erasing women from society, as opposed to their

stated purpose? Why should I believe you over them?

I have no problem with creating laws banning this type of CULTURAL (not religiously required) costuming

Is Christmas a religious holiday? Is going to church a religious act?

[riderinthestorm]

8. Uh. what do you believe is their stated purpose?

Their purpose as I know it is to erase women from full equality in society.

Read the Quran - please don't just believe me, do some research and learn the facts yourself then. The burqa nor the full face veil (or even the hijab actually), are religious requirements. This type of garb is cultural. Period.

[ZombieHorde]

9. The purpose is modesty. Strangers don't have the absolute right

to see your face and figure.

They see some women in the West getting fake breasts, lip injections, botox, etc., and they think that is the result of not covering up. Constantly judging women by their looks, which does happen in our culture, has not been good for all women. Is plastic surgery less extreme than wearing a black ghost costume? Plastic surgery and niqabs are an attempt to level the playing field.

Christmas and going to church are not mentioned in the Christian Holy Bible, yet these are viewed as more religious religious than strictly cultural.

[Quantess]

12. Same old knee-jerk argument. No, the fact that some women get plastic surgery

does NOT make it all even or equivalent somehow.

The face-covering burqas need to be banned.

[ZombieHorde]

18. An argument is a reason for an opinion.

You did not offer a reason for your opinion, so you did not make an argument.

I see "knee-jerk argument," an its ilk, are trendy on DU right now. If my argument is so thoughtless, like a knee-jerk, then forming a rebuttal should be very simple.

[riderinthestorm]

19. If you believe the burqa and niqab are really about modesty, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you

Virtually all cultures make rules and laws regarding what is or is not going to be acceptable clothing in the public square. Women in patriarchal cultures are especially targeted (we have laws regulating what women can wear in public in our western cultures as well). MANY cultural practices (that are almost always purported to be "religious"), have been deemed by law to be inappropriate and unacceptable (FGM or say, tribal Aboriginal full body nudity are two examples).

You could argue that full body nudity is more empowering to women (the female body is very powerful). Full nudity is also certainly cultural and isn't misogynistic. Yet you aren't providing links on your activism on empowering women to go fully naked are you? Nope you are cloaking your own misogyny under some modesty euphemism which is in reality just another way to oppress women as full equal partners in a society.

I don't buy it. Not for a minute. In many societies, full face veiling is banned by law (you can't go into a bank for example with a full face mask) so yes, cultures have decided whether it IS an absolute right for a stranger to see your face.

Your argument conflating the religious and cultural aspects of Christmas proves my point. It isn't in the bible, neither is the burqa or niqab mentioned in the Quran. Ban them both then. Christmas however isn't a misogynistic cultural affectation that degrades half the population, so on the whole, I have less of a problem with it than the purposeful erasure of women from society. But sure, if that's the way you see it, ban them both as archaic cultural relics if that's really the ultimate direction you meant to take this.

Just so we're clear though, the Tunisian Islamists are seeking to oppress women more with this action. They are trying to import a foreign culturally oppressive shroud that doesn't have any history in Tunisia and are using VIOLENT protests to try to jam it onto this country's culture. I don't see the celebration of Christmas as strictly analogous on a human rights scale. YMMV.

[ZombieHorde]

20. Let's see, lots of stuff here...

Virtually all cultures make rules and laws regarding what is or is not going to be acceptable clothing in the public square. Women in patriarchal cultures are especially targeted (we have laws regulating what women can wear in public in our western cultures as well). MANY cultural practices (that are almost always purported to be "religious"), have been deemed by law to be inappropriate and unacceptable (FGM or say, tribal Aboriginal full body nudity are two examples).

I agree.

You could argue that full body nudity is more empowering to women (the female body is very powerful). Full nudity is also certainly cultural and isn't misogynistic.

I agree.

Full nudity is also certainly cultural and isn't misogynistic.

Sometimes true; sometimes false.

Yet you aren't providing links on your activism on empowering women to go fully naked are you?

I did not post links to any type of fashion, or lack there of. You didn't post any links either. This accusation is bizarre, and makes me question your state of mind. (drunk?)

Nope you are cloaking your own misogyny under some modesty euphemism which is in reality just another way to oppress women as full equal partners in a society.

I am not the one arguing for this:



That is your goal, not mine.

I don't buy it. Not for a minute.

I suspected this was your feeling on the matter after I read the first two paragraphs of your reply.

In many societies, full face veiling is banned by law (you can't go into a bank for example with a full face mask) so yes, cultures have decided whether it IS an absolute right for a stranger to see your face.

I agree some cultures have, but not every culture. I am personally against any government mandated dress code, except in a few cases; e.g., a surgeon wearing a face mask during surgery is a really good idea.

Your argument conflating the religious and cultural aspects of Christmas proves my point. It isn't in the bible, neither is the burqa or niqab mentioned in the Quran. Ban them both then.

I wasn't saying we should ban Christmas. I was saying something can be religious even if it is not in the holy texts of the religion in question. Christmas is not in the Christian Holy Bible, yet it is still a religious holiday.

Christmas however isn't a misogynistic cultural affectation that degrades half the population, so on the whole, I have less of a problem with it than the purposeful erasure of women from society.

Christmas celebrates the birth of a misogynist, but I agree the actual modern practice of the holiday is not misogynist. What I don't agree with is the niqab and burka are for erasing women from society. Their stated purpose fits their religious beliefs more than your stated purpose. Modesty is extremely important to many of them.

I think you are trying to speak for all women, but that does not treat them as free agents.

What about the way these people dress?



Should the way they dress be illegal? Where I live, the temperature and wind chill fall way below zero. Full facial covering is needed for anyone outside longer than about two minutes. If the Muslim women started dressing like this, would you still want them arrested?

[riderinthestorm]

21. You seem to want it both ways, no laws on clothing or some laws

that YOU get to decide are either misogynistic or not in YOUR mind. Your lack of consistency was my poorly made point (I was in a hurry and the burqa threads make me impatient anyway). You cannot be an advocate of SOME laws without acknowledging that a conversation can and will occur about what type of clothing a culture and society want in the public square. And I would stipulate then that if there are SOME laws, then banning misogynistic cultural practices like shrouding women is fair game for discussion (and banning).

As for Christmas, I believe it's laughable to assert that its a strictly religious holiday. It's 99% cultural. Those strict Christians for whom the holiday IS still about Christ would be in favor of banning it in it's current form too imho. Bad analogy.

The burqa and niqab are not about modesty. That is a lie both online and in RL. I have no problem speaking "for women" on this. Any person who holds onto such backward cultural practices MUST be called on it. It's taken decades to bring FGM into the public eye as a terrible cultural practice (masquerading as a religious practice) but that doesn't mean we stop because someone may get offended because they are wrong. Some things simply must stop and erasing women from society is one of them. FGMs stated purpose is to eradicate female pleasure during sex - that's a perfectly responsible patriarchal religious position. That doesn't mean we need to allow FGM, condone it or stay silent about it.

As for your pics at the bottom, well I'd say they make my point perfectly. Covering the face is cultural, not religious. Let's be clear, the woman at the Tunisian university was not wearing a balaclava, mittens and a wooly scarf because of sub zero temps. The Islamist men VIOLENTLY trying to jam this shrouding onto the Tunisian society are not advocating for equal opportunity for women either. The Salafist movement is not about empowering women, ever.

That you haven't said one word of condemnation on their despicable violence says volumes about you too. ANYONE who is advocating relegating women to secondary status by any means, should be arrested.

[ZombieHorde]

24. "that YOU get to decide are either misogynistic or not in YOUR mind."

I am not saying I should decide what women wear. That is your position. My position is women should get to decide what they will wear. Don't get our positions mixed up.

Your lack of consistency was my poorly made point (I was in a hurry and the burqa threads make me impatient anyway). You cannot be an advocate of SOME laws without acknowledging that a conversation can and will occur about what type of clothing a culture and society want in the public square.

I have been promoting conversation; keep up.

As for Christmas, I believe it's laughable to assert that its a strictly religious holiday. It's 99% cultural. Those strict Christians for whom the holiday IS still about Christ would be in favor of banning it in it's current form too imho. Bad analogy.

I just made a poll asking others their opinion on Christmas. Let's see how it turns out.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
I tried to make it as plain as possible.

The burqa and niqab are not about modesty. That is a lie both online and in RL.

Prove it. Why should I believe you over them?

I have no problem speaking "for women" on this.

You also have no problems jailing women for it. If women are the victim, why lock them up?

Any person who holds onto such backward cultural practices MUST be called on it. It's taken decades to bring FGM into the public eye as a terrible cultural practice (masquerading as a religious practice) but that doesn't mean we stop because someone may get offended because they are wrong.

I agree, we should not be fucking with babies' genitals.

As for your pics at the bottom, well I'd say they make my point perfectly. Covering the face is cultural, not religious. Let's be clear, the woman at the Tunisian university was not wearing a balaclava, mittens and a wooly scarf because of sub zero temps. The Islamist men VIOLENTLY trying to jam this shrouding onto the Tunisian society are not advocating for equal opportunity for women either. The Salafist movement is not about empowering women, ever.

What if the women start wearing scarves, hats, and jackets instead of niqabs? They will still be completely covered, except for the eyes. Same effect, different look. Should we lock up people who dress warmly?

That you haven't said one word of condemnation on their despicable violence says volumes about you too.

Gasp! I know how to stay on topic!

ANYONE who is advocating relegating women to secondary status by any means, should be arrested.

OK, so we arrest all conservative Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is a lot of people. Where do we put them? What do we do with their now psychologically-damaged children? Your plan is insane. You are thinking with your emotions instead of your logic. Your plan only hurts women; it does not save them.

If you are a Christian, you may wish to change your religion since Christ specifically said men are the head of women.

[riderinthestorm]

26. "Keep up"? Nice. And you say you want a conversation? Really?

You are the one who said that there are SOME laws on face covering and that you'd be okay with that (surgical face masks). So I repeat, why do you get to choose which clothing LAWS are okay and which aren't? (remember that particular point was dealing with LAWS about clothing. I don't believe it's me whose getting mixed up). Women have always had clothing restrictions on what they can and cannot wear in public. Men as well to a certain extent. You cannot show up to court in a thong, a KKK outfit, or wearing Nazi clothing. We as a society decide these things and codify them into laws. The burqa imo falls under the rubric of troublesome clothing that requires special scrutiny (and clearly the force of law). Unless you are really advocating Justice Scalia has the right to appear in a full KKK outfit complete with hood....

Your statement that shrouding women is all about modesty doesn't endure scrutiny based on Islam's own religious texts. You can take their (Stockholm Syndrome) word for it all you like but I have proved that it's cultural and not religious. Its not in their text. Anyone who says that it's a religiously based modesty issue is lying (or brainwashed). I see you've glossed right over the comparison of the cultural (masquerading as religious) practice of FGM to shrouding women in public.... That's because you don't have an answer to that comparison. They both stem from deeply misogynistic patriarchal religious roots. But your avoidance of discussing that is noted.

I guess the police will decide who gets arrested when it comes to clothes (or the lack thereof). I have a very, very strong hunch however that they are going to be able to discern the difference between a burqa and a woman dressed in a hat, scarf and mittens. If you want to get stupid about this though (since you obviously can't discern the difference), the police can ask a person to remove their face coverings and make an arrest based upon compliance with their request. Clear enough for you? I know that if you went into a bank with your scarf obscuring your face, you'd be told to remove it and arrested if you didn't comply. Since we don't have jails full of conservative Jews, Christians and Muslims who refused to remove their burqas I'm not too worried about overcrowding issues.

And please, honestly, banning burqas hurts women? Talk about fucked up logic! This old atheist isn't amused.

[ZombieHorde]

27. You are completely misinterpreting everything I am saying, so I will just ask you one question.

If you believe women are the victims, then why do you want them arrested? Punishing the victim is not something we normally do.

[riderinthestorm]

29. Was Patty Hearst a victim? How about the Manson family members?

What about suicide bombers (or those who attempt and fail)?

Are they victims? Brainwashed? Willing accomplices? Should they never be charged with crimes? How about the women at the FLDS compounds who force their daughters into marriage at 12 years old, or who willingly abandon their sons when they hit puberty? I believe we have punished victims before, absolutely we have. BUT with that said, a caveat: that punishment is usually tempered by common sense and justice.

Women who grow up indoctrinated within a patriarchal or patriarchal religious culture often cannot make judgement calls about their behavior. Some, like those who suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, actually become even more gung-ho then their original enforcers. I believe it's a very fine line and that the police will have to walk that fine line. The French woman in the burqa getting arrested in the picture you posted was blatantly provoking arrest. She went there to get arrested. A 14 year old girl similarly shrouded would get a warning from the very same police and they would locate whoever put her into that garment for arrest.

In France 91 women have been arrested in the past six months since the "burqa ban" went into affect but only 9 of those have actually proceeded to court which means that only the most militant are really defiant about the law. It also demonstrates to me that the law is flexible enough to accommodate circumstances (and yes, even possible victim hood). It was estimated that in France, before the law went into effect, that somewhere between 2 - 3000 niqabis (women who wear a full face mask) would be affected by the law. The number of arrests indicate the number of women who wear the garment is much lower than that, or the law has persuaded many women to stop wearing it. Furthermore, the low number of cases going to court indicates that most of those arrested ARE victims and in that case the ones who are forcing them to wear it will face charges, not the woman in the burqa.

Do we have an obligation to protect the rights of the minority you ask? (I can already see what you may ask next) Of course I answer, except when it's such a significantly negative cultural issue that it deeply conflicts with the host countries culture. For example, in France, in order to accommodate 9 face veiling women +/-, France would have to abrogate it's entire history of secularism, its own convulsive revolution, its cultural aversion to face coverings, it's goals of female equality etc. etc. I freely confess, I am not a cultural relativist so I'm not moved by the very small number of women who so desperately want to wear this garment and are willing to risk arrest.

And FWIW, I believe your meaning is coming through crystal clear.

[ZombieHorde]

30. I found your argument interesting, and I have been thinking it over.

The idea of a mass, cultural Stockholm syndrome is interesting to me because it could help explain so many conservatives, but that is a different subject.

I would like to see some pier reviewed evidence the niqabis (thanks for the new word) are actually suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Were women in the US suffering Stockholm syndrome before the sexual revolution, with the obvious exception of the feminist pioneers.

[riderinthestorm]

31. Thanks for listening. I can't ask for more than that.

The burqa threads are always interesting to me too even as I grow increasingly impatient with them. But the only thing we can ask of each other at DU is to have a conversation about the issues, and listen to each other, and think about the others' position - its the best of what this site offers. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on perspective), I've got a fairly hardened stance on this issue and believe in my position very strongly.

As for peer reviewed evidence, well maybe somebody could/would do it. Nobody has yet that I know.

I think a lot of patriarchal systems rely upon an authoritarian model and religion definitely buys into all that so you are going to find a lot of overlap, (especially with political conservatives!) I think the overwhelming numbers of women pre-WWII fully believed and acted as though they were second class citizens within their societies because they bought into the whole religious and cultural mindset of those times, though not as extreme in their suppression of women as the ME cultures clearly.... I'd almost think that WWII began empowering women even before the 60s because so many women had to step into traditional men's roles and do those jobs. I'm not sure we would have had a sexual revolution if we hadn't had a Rosie-the-Riveter generation before that....

But that's REALLY a different subject and I'm a feminist, not a women's history scholar.

[MH1]

32. Your last 3 pictures - people shouldn't be dressed like that INSIDE A BUILDING

unless of course it's winter and the heat's off for some reason. If someone's dressed like that in a climate controlled building it would be considered mighty odd, wouldn't it? Perhaps even suspicious?

This woman was trying to enroll in a college. Presumably she was INSIDE. She has no reason - or right, in my view - to hide her face. For public safety, I believe people should show their faces. I also have no problem walking through a metal detector. If the Quran forbids walking through a metal detector, or some 'religion' claims their Holy Scripture forbids it, then do those people get to enroll and access a school where everyone else walks through the metal detectors? Not just no but hell no.

The veil and burqa have a history as tools of misogyny. It's bullshit to pretend that things are the other way around, and reasonable to ban these things in a CIVILIZED society.

[Confusious]

28. Nothing in the quran says they have to wear veils

Only the head has to be covered. So yea, it's a cultural thing to keep women in their place.

Now, if the men want to wear one, we can talk.

Christmas and a garment made to keep women in their place, real logic fail for comparisons there.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

6. veils bans are bigoted in countries where muslims are a minority

where they are not, i think veil bans are probably very effective at reducing misogyny. ex: turkey vs saudi arabia.

[Quantess]

13. Face covering veils are offensive to women.

People in western cultures have a right to be free from looking at women wrapped up so pathetically. It's depressing to look at.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

17. you dont have a right to demand that i show you my face

also there is such a thing in the US, as religious freedom & thank the constitution for that.

many things are depressing. that doesnt mean you go about legislating them

[chrisa]

22. You realize the irony of that statement, right?

Veils are one of the world's most disgusting denials of female humanity. It's basically telling them to hide their identity behind a piece of cloth for the sake of men.

The veil is misogynistic itself.

[Zoigal]

2. Just this afternoon i saw an woman wearing the full face

veil (just eye slits) walking with a young man in Torrance. Rather unusual in
this area.
Wonder if they take them off for passport pictures/driver's
licenses? Of course, many aren't able to drive in their home
countries.....z

[ZombieHorde]

25. Do you think she should have been arrested? nt

[Bosonic]

3. Seems to be escalating

Tunisia police use teargas on Islamist protesters

(Reuters) - Police in the Tunisian capital used teargas on Sunday to try to disperse hundreds of Islamists who were attacking them with stones, knives and batons, a Reuters reporter at the scene said.

The Islamists were protesting against a ban on women who wear the niqab, or full-face veil, enrolling in university, and the decision by a Tunisian television station to broadcast an animated film depicting Allah.

Several hundred Islamist protesters gathered outside the main university campus in Tunis, and from there went to the working-class neighborhood of Jebel El-Ahmar, north of the city center, where the clashes with police broke out.

The Reuters reporter said there were about 100 police vehicles, and several hundred police officers wearing anti-riot gear. He said he saw several officers running away to escape the protesters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/09/us-tunisia-islamists-clashes-idUSTRE7980X220111009

[La Lioness Priyanka]

7. i support this ban in tunisia even though i strongly condemned it in france

i think it will reduce misogyny in tunisia and the muslim-majority state have the moral right to decide this

in france, it was only done out of bigotry.

[Fool Count]

10. They just stormed a TV station over showing a movie they did not approve of.

Welcome to the new "democratic" Tunisia. Just wait until they get a parliamentary majority to make that "democracy" even more "popular".

[StarsInHerHair]

11. since the Taliban instituted full veils & burqas I am against them, they are

literally blacking out a woman's face & person. Now if the veiling was sheer chiffon, like Maureen O'Hara wore in Sinbad 1947, it would be a little different; she wore a white chiffon face veil & had the same on her head, technically she was veiled, but somehow it didn't seem as oppressive.

[Little Tich]

14. Opinion from Tunisia: Revealed an intruder on us and on Islam (Google Translate from Arabic)

It seems that the issue of student excavating which refused to disclose her identity and her face to be drawn like the other students in the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of Sousse and violence on the basis of author of the College by seven candidates for the development and it seems that several parties calling on the government today, the position and the decision to settle such abuses exotic Tunisian society.


Since independence was not talking about the veil be on the Tunisian people and the elite, but after the revolution, the increasing number of veiled women are eye-catching, and that did not quite live up to the level of social phenomenon, it refers to the beginning of the term symbols of the movement the Salafist Jihadist for its presence in Tunisia, although slowly, through some visible manifestations of the phenomenon (the veil for women and a long robe and a beard للرجال). For men).

This veil intruder customs and traditions of Tunisia and even the Arab and Islamic countries is... To dress traditionally for women in certain tribes, lived in certain circumstances in certain places of the earth, chosen by the community to express the inferiority of women as anything that created them is rugged must Lester does not see the man, and the evidence that he is not from the teachings of Islam at all Hwan women Hajj is not wearing the gloves is not like that for some women wear to shake hands with men while they are not claims originally hand-shake and can do without.

.. Revealed unacceptable .. . Reject all Tunisians, if not openly in secret because they are afraid of the reaction and violence that has already been used by some who advocate the need for women to disappear, Tunisia and beyond. . He also rejected by the Islamists and their leaders because they believe he was not a personal freedom, nor in obedience to divine law and human endeavor.. But according to what is being said by some of the discussions on the columns of newspapers or in private and a public act affects public safety because it prevents the identification of the wearer, as some have baptized to wear it for different purposes.. It is also unacceptable because some supporters are defending him revealed that the necessary use of force and violence, threats and intimidation, which really affects the public security and scare the women in Tunisia, including women veiled.

. These small groups of Salafis that give rise to confusion as veiled prevented from access to some private educational institutions - a place where the veil is rejected strongly the publication 2005 - can not see them today (do not say in the future) a measure of what's in the Tunisian society which Khalsth revolution Publication 108 and are veiled, and others are free to wear as fashion or for the women wore the first centuries of migration and wear it when they wanted and saw that good.

. That the veil imposed by some of the extremists on their wives, daughters and girlfriends rejected the Tunisian people and is considered a red line between what is acceptable in society and the twenty-first century and what is unacceptable, and refer to the impossibility of collective living near the joint with the surrounding society and its institutions as a whole.. In the latter no one in the Tunisian society imposes on the woman to come out of her home was any order if you take the decision away from him and refusing to put the dividing line between them and him Bnkab conceal their identity and puts people at risk in the form of "borrowed" them male and used it.

Alia Ben Slim

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dtunisia%2Bassabah%26hl%3Den%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:en-US%26prmd%3Dimvns&rurl=translate.google.com.au&sl=ar&u=http://www.assabah.com.tn/article-58725.html&usg=ALkJrhilL82g7Ayz8bN2mYfo4HUlPj3lWA

Source: http://www.assabah.com.tn/

[Little Tich]

15. I must apologise on behalf of Google for the crappy translation.

Obviously, Google Translate is not a finished product.

[JCMach1]

16. Whether the intention is designed to separate men from women, or

to separate Muslims from a larger civil society...

Either way, it's wrong.

[slackmaster]

23. The Fashion Police strike again!

[AverageJoe90]

33. I hope the Tunisian people are able to defeat these dastardly Islamists.......

.....although that wouldn't be good for the neo-cons, of course. ;)