-
"The political clamor to ban the burqa is not an evidence-based policy. It is a misguided effort to enhance the status of women grounded in speculation about what a woman hidden in a burqa must feel. Yet whatever she feels will certainly not be changed by a law telling her what not to wear. And were there a law, how would it be enforced? Would there be a fine for wearing a burqa? Would there be clothes police? The whole notion is reminiscent of the prohibitions applied to women in Afghanistan before the Taliban lost power."
-
"Rhode Island has a lightning rod of a formal name — State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations — that harks back to its prominent role in the slave trade and makes some of its residents cringe."
-
"The arson attack on the Greenwich mosque comes after a very similar attack on a mosque in Luton last month, which I blogged about at the time, and an attack on a mosque in Bishop's Stortford the month before that. Those attacks too are believed by the worshippers to have been far-right inspired, with the Luton one coming as it did in the wake of several written threats of a racist nature."
-
"Just before 2PM, Lieutenant Connoly of the Midtown Taskforce demanded that the People of Color Contingent leave the parade. The reason given was that a delay of 6 blocks existed between the People of Color contingent and the contingent in front of them. NYPD raised the issue of the gap once and POC contingent marshals were in the process of closing the gap. Kris Hayashi, Executive Director of Audre Lorde Project (ALP), and Loyda Colon also of ALP explained to Lieutenant Connoly, that they were in the process of closing the gap and Lieutenant Connoly refused to listen. Lieutenant Connoly then insisted that the POC contingent leave the parade, and attempted to arrest both Colon and Hayashi. Lieutenant Connoly then ejected Harlan Pruden, the driver of NE2SS’ support vehicle and co-founder of NE2SS, other members of NE2SS (who led the People of Color Contingent), and Hayashi from the parade. Hayashi was physically dragged off the parade route."
-
"Al Sawaf echoes Al Awadhi’s views on the alarming impact of gender-insensitive soaps on children. She warns that young viewers grow up believing these are normal and acceptable and this could make young males more violent towards women and young females more submissive to violence."
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
Mo wrote:
The funny thing about the article “My Burqa Is None of Your Business” is that the author is male and therefore will never be asked to dress in such a way. Even though he brings up great points in this commentary, it’s disappointing that on both sides of the debate, the voices are overwhelmingly male.
Posted 04 Jul 2009 at 6:11 pm ¶
unico wrote:
France and UK is pissing me of with this “No Burqa” BS.
For every article I read, and every comment I read after the article, all of them show the same ignorance. That these women are being “held back” or “abused” – because they are wearing cloth.
At no point have I see anyone comment about how these women truly feel. And I am sure many of the women would say they like wearing their burqa!
If they didn’t want to wear them. DUH they wouldn’t wear them! There are many in America that don’t wear them, because of their own choice. There are some that do wear them, because of their own choice.
I am glad Obama said he is not going to regulate what someone from another country wears.
Posted 05 Jul 2009 at 11:14 pm ¶
Nate wrote:
Unico. Right…. the patriarchy does cut acorss colouor/race lines you know.
obviously, banning people wearing what they will, particalulray to meet their religious/ or scoial values is wrong, and pushing those folk out of society/othering.
Its shame so many people just don’t get it.
But com’n, the patriarchy does cut across colour/race lines you know….
And really – if you believe what obama says abouyt that (as if he has a chocie, what with your constitution and all), maybe you should be asking why he thinks ‘extrodinary’ rendition is still a necessary and useful tool. Or why thos se remaining in gimto arne’t going to get civlian trials.
Its very easy to have principles when you can avoid the political pain of actually having implement them.
Posted 06 Jul 2009 at 7:19 am ¶
Zahra wrote:
As a born-and-bred RIer, I have very mixed feelings about the state’s proposed name change.
The fact that “plantation” in the name never referred to the institution of slavery really bothers me. Words change their meanings over the years. Sometimes they need to change to keep sync with our current understanding. But given how rarely anyone actually uses the state’s full name–when they do, it’s usually in a historic context–I have trouble seeing it as an ongoing symbol of racism like the Confederate flag.
Don’t get me wrong–RI wasn’t a center of plantation slavery, but it DOES have some agricultural slavey in its history, especially in South County. More importantly, it was a MAJOR hub of the slave trade. You can’t legislate away history. What RI should be doing is more openly acknowledging (possibly apologizing for) that, talking about it, changing and challenging some of the legacies that come from that (like John Brown’s money). And more heavily publicizing just how much black history there is in the state.
I have a problem with changing a name that had nothing to do with slavey and doing nothing about the very real legacy of slavery in the state, which lies elsewhere. It seems very bait & switch to me.
On the other hand, if this is going to turn into a culture-wars-type battle between left-leaning African-American Democrats and don’t-let’s-mention-the-icky-past Republicans, which seems to be the subtext of the NYT article, I know I’m going to stand with the 1st group.
Posted 06 Jul 2009 at 12:16 pm ¶
jeff wrote:
The thing about the burka is that many people feel uncomfortable if they cant see somebody elses face. Im sure it wouldnt be popular if young people started wearing balaclavas to the disco.
There is nothing in the koran spelling out that women need to be covered completely. A direct-from-allah book might be expected to mention explicitly such a drastic measure. Veiling is an ancient practice dating back well before islam and the current vogue for it in some muslim circles is based on the saudi, wahabi interpretation of islam. A very strict version indeed.
Posted 06 Jul 2009 at 5:16 pm ¶
Unico wrote:
@Nate
I said nothing about the Ethnicity or Race of the Women.
I am not sure ‘what’ you are trying to say. It is very jumbled.
Posted 08 Jul 2009 at 5:48 am ¶