SENSITIZE ©

Lugh wrote:I believe it might also be an arrestable offence in Belfast, Derry, Dublin, Glasgow, Leeds and Manchester.

Not quite right, Lugh. Although arrestable in Belfast, Derry and Dublin it's seen as acceptable socially in Glasgow and Leeds and in Manchester it is now compulsory.

Lugh wrote:Then of course there's the difficulty of cramming reverend ministers into sugar-cubes.

This will be the Buddhist priests. You just wait until the bad ones are reincarnated as liberty cap.

And as for that rubbish excuse about licking the face of fundamental Muslims. The Judge might have bought that crap but we ain't.

We've drifted off topic. Sorry.

spacecadet wrote: Not quite right, Lugh. Although arrestable in Belfast, Derry and Dublin it's seen as acceptable socially in Glasgow and Leeds and in Manchester it is now compulsory.

Ah well then. Ya can't argue with progress...

spacecadet wrote:This will be the Buddhist priests. You just wait until the bad ones are reincarnated as liberty cap.

See, that's where things are different between England and Ireland mate. Liberty caps grow profusely here in Derry and it's an annual outing to pick the lil divils. All of them are devout Buddhists by the way. It's actually quite endearing, seeing them swaying in the breeze, glistening in the morning dew. They're absolutely content and don't even complain when we yank them out of the soil, wrap them in newspaper, dry them on radiators and bung them into teapots. Clearly they know something Zen and have no real worries...

spacecadet wrote:And as for that rubbish excuse about licking the face of fundamental Muslims. The Judge might have bought that crap but we ain't.

Well, as long as 'The Beak's' happy, where's the problem? Eh? Eh..?

spacecadet wrote:We've drifted off topic. Sorry.

I started it dude ...

Are you apolo..?

Oh Christ Dave..! You haven't dropped a few Catholic Guilt Trips..! Oh dear, oh dear....

Well, bollocks to democracy then. During the Dispatches debate earlier tonight the chance to see the cartoons that offended Muslims last year was given. People in the audience were asked to vote on whether they should show these cartoons in the studio and to the home audiences. 69% said they were in favour of seeing them.

Then Jon Snow produced a purple envelope from his pocket and read some text that said Channel 4 would not show them because they could cause further offence. Didn't Channel 4 set out in its early days to be the broadcasting station that allowed freedom of speech and courted controversy? What is going on?

Everyone who isn't from the Muslim faith should be very alarmed by this. It's positive discrimination and it's a crime...

This has become a huge talking point all over Europe.
In my opinion the women who wear the veil have been indoctrainated, the veil I Believe was used by the Sultan to keep other men from lusting after his Huge hareem of ladies and I suppose that living in a dusty hot and dry climate the veil would offer excellent protection to the wearer from the adverse elements.
But it sends out TOTALY the wrong signals. What a woman wearing a veil is basically saying is that men are so anamilastic and lustful that the sight of a womans face is enough to bring about impure thoughts into our heads and could lead us to commit adultery. I do not believe for one second that anyone seriously considers the face to be an visualy erotic part of the anatomy. (perhaps if its eating a flake but that a whole diferent kettle of onions)
If we bring the veil wearing to its extreme conclusion then imagine a world where we were all veiled. We would never really know anyone and sales of foundation lipgloss and rouge would plummet.
A typical coversation from such times

"you know wee sammy?"
"naw"
"sure you do, wears the blue veil with the orange trim"
"Oh... yeah that sammy, what about him?"
"He got his hair cut, I think"
"did he now, the little devil"

Diesel Engine wrote:This has become a huge talking point all over Europe.

Very true Diesel dude. I just heard two men chatting about it over in the John Street Chippy...

Diesel Engine wrote:In my opinion the women who wear the veil have been indoctrainated, the veil I Believe was used by the Sultan to keep other men from lusting after his Huge hareem of ladies and I suppose that living in a dusty hot and dry climate the veil would offer excellent protection to the wearer from the adverse elements.

Fair point man. But it's not as if it's necessary here though. If it is a historical piece of dresswear then maybe it should be donned on special occasions within their culture.

Diesel Engine wrote:But it sends out TOTALY the wrong signals. What a woman wearing a veil is basically saying is that men are so anamilastic and lustful that the sight of a womans face is enough to bring about impure thoughts into our heads and could lead us to commit adultery. I do not believe for one second that anyone seriously considers the face to be an visualy erotic part of the anatomy. (perhaps if its eating a flake but that a whole diferent kettle of onions)

I disagree mate. Much as I'm tuned slightly differently from the average male, I find a woman's face something truly beautiful to look upon. The softness of her skin, the curve of her chin, her eyes, lips... All delightful in most cases. Shove a flake in her gob and I'd run a mile... Mind you, if Pink Floyd's; Great Gig In The Sky was playing in the background I'd stick around... I know, I know. I'm a hypocrite...

Diesel Engine wrote:If we bring the veil wearing to its extreme conclusion then imagine a world where we were all veiled. We would never really know anyone and sales of foundation lipgloss and rouge would plummet.

Nail firmly on head dude... Revlon would go under and there would be a civil war...

Diesel Engine wrote:A typical coversation from such times

"you know wee sammy?"
"naw"
"sure you do, wears the blue veil with the orange trim"
"Oh... yeah that sammy, what about him?"
"He got his hair cut, I think"
"did he now, the little devil"

Sammy always was a non-conformist. Feckin' blue and orange..! In October ..!

He's clearly lost the feckin' plot.

Ev'rybody's wearing green with purple this month...

Lugh wrote: I disagree mate. Much as I'm tuned slightly differently from the average male, I find a woman's face something truly beautiful to look upon. The softness of her skin, the curve of her chin, her eyes, lips... All delightful in most cases. Shove a flake in her gob and I'd run a mile... Mind you, if Pink Floyd's; Great Gig In The Sky was playing in the background I'd stick around... I know, I know. I'm a hypocrite....

You missunderstand me Lugh. Of course I find womens faces beautiful, however, I do NOT find them EROTIC or SHAMEFUl or PRIVATE. They are not something that should be hidden from view from all men, apart from the womens Husband.
To make the face, which communicates more than half of our emotions non verbally, into something that should be hidden demeans us all, and makes true communication and any chance of making a real connection with someone very difficult.

edited some horrendous typos

Ultimately, this is not about religion at all. It's gender politics, control, and fear. It's about men being afraid of letting women communicate, of letting them be part of society. It's about men trying to keep absolute control over 'their' women. Prevent them communicating, and you prevent their brains developing, you prevent them understanding how much you are controlling them, imprisoning them.

Except of course you don't. The tide is turning. You can hide their faces but you can't quell their spirit. Watch out, guys...

delph_ambi wrote:It's gender politics, control, and fear.

Here, here. That's exactly what it is.

delph_ambi wrote: Watch out, guys.

Easy Tiger! You're preaching to the (almost) converted here.

delph_ambi wrote:Ultimately, this is not about religion at all. It's gender politics, control, and fear. It's about men being afraid of letting women communicate, of letting them be part of society. It's about men trying to keep absolute control over 'their' women. Prevent them communicating, and you prevent their brains developing, you prevent them understanding how much you are controlling them, imprisoning them.

100% right Delph mate. It's infuriating that this situation is being encouraged because it belittles every positive step taken in the name of civil liberties and freedom of expression/speech/thought and it is gender politics of the most ugly kind.

I'm livid at Channel 4's position on this too. In the space of 16 hours they've become a joke in my opinion. Dickheads...

The UK, Ireland and Europe is made up of peoples from all over the world. Many of whom came here to get away from dogmatic cultures or horrific wars. For a few to demand what they see as a right to drag us all into their backward thinking notions is not on. Not on at all...

delph_ambi wrote:Except of course you don't. The tide is turning. You can hide their faces but you can't quell their spirit. Watch out, guys...

Be loud and be proud Delph ...

Diesel Engine wrote: You missunderstand me Lugh. Of course I find womens faces beautiful, however, I do NOT find them EROTIC or SHAMEFUl or PRIVATE. They are not something that should be hidden from view from all men, apart from the womens Husband.
To make the face, which communicates more than half of our emotions non verbally, into something that should be hidden demeans us all, and makes true communication and any chance of making a real connection with someone very difficult.

I possibly didn't pick up on your point clearly Diesel mate. I agree with you fully. The face is a point of reference and a major one at that in human communication. It could be argued against and it could even be said that we communicate quite adequately here with words only, but in reality, facial expressions, eye contact, even perspiration all work as language for humanity.

Another point worth exploring is this whole situation where Police in Greater Manchester are being asked to not carry out arrests of known criminals in Muslim communities during Ramadan. This is going to blow up into a major dispute in the UK and there is going to be violence.

It will be interesting to see if the few extremist Muslims (please note - not all Muslims) who wish to have us all grubbing in the mud before their notion of a god will show respect for Christians (not that I care too much about them either) and hold off from fighting during their holy time of Christmas. Something tells me the ignorant fools wont. Will the Police arrest them for culturalist bigotry? Fiver says they don't...

?

spacecadet wrote:I've just noticed that our work Christmas party is being arranged by the Asian guys in the office. So I reckon I'll be OK.

Dave, can you please edit / remove that last message mate? It's nothing personal and I'm not angry at you, but Asian people or people from Asian backgrounds may take offence at it. There is a massive difference between a few fanatics from one sect of a faith and an entire race of people.

Thanks...

Post removed.

I think you summed up the veil debate quite nicely there.