Muslim couple denied Swiss citizenship over no handshake
Source: BBC
A Muslim couple have been denied Swiss citizenship after they refused to shake hands with people of the opposite sex during their interview, officials say. They confirmed the decision on Friday, further citing the couple's failure to integrate and respect gender equality.
The couple, interviewed months ago, also struggled to answer questions by members of the opposite sex.
Officials stressed they were not rejected based on their religion but for their lack of respect for gender equality.
"The constitution and equality between men and women prevails over bigotry," said Pierre-Antoine Hilbrand, who was part of the commission that interviewed the couple.
Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45232147
nycbos
(6,030 posts)Refusing to shake someones hand is where I draw the line.
colorado_ufo
(5,711 posts)barbtries
(28,689 posts)how are people that invested in patriarchy and that fundamentalist religiously ever going to fit in a secular world where equality is the ideal being strived toward?
one wonders why they were trying - it seems as if living in that culture would be uncomfortable for them.
olegramps
(8,200 posts)marble falls
(56,029 posts)MurrayDelph
(5,271 posts)Howie Mandel's citizenship, and seems him back to Canada?
He hadn't shaken hand with anyone in decades.
Doodley
(8,972 posts)More_Cowbell
(2,190 posts)That's not a gender issue
JI7
(89,151 posts)pnwmom
(108,915 posts)required for the citizenship application, if it required speaking to an interviewer of a different gender.
Shoonra
(513 posts)There's the same taboo among Orthodox Jews against physical contact, even a handshake, with a non-relative of the opposite sex. My wife was mildly embarrassed when she was introduced to a distinguished Orthodox rabbi and, altho he was quite willing to discuss serious topics with her, he ignored her outstretched hand.
I suspect there are Christian denominations that similarly discouraged physical contact. It isn't hostility or a lack of respect; it is, in fact, a taboo intended to prevent sin.
nycbos
(6,030 posts)It's just as wrong as when Muslims do it.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,684 posts)And it feels as if I'm being completely disrespected as a woman, being treated as an inferior person, not worthy of a handshake. I don't care how much it's prettied up as "preventing sin", because quite frankly, if shaking hands is a sin . . . well, really? Or if shaking hands with a woman will lead you to sin, then YOU'RE the problem, not the woman or the handshake.
It's crap like this that leads me to have a very low opinion of much of organized religion.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)wouldn't shake your husband's hand (father, brother - any male). It's not a sexist thing. Not that I agree with it at all, I think it's ridiculous.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,684 posts)a man's hand is that HE might then sin? If so, that is totally sexist. And if the possibility that either might sin, it is gender neutral but is still complete crap. Any time I've seen any justification for separation of the sexes, the veiling of women, not shaking hands, and so on and so forth, it's because the MEN are so weak that the mere seeing a woman's face or shaking her hand or whatever will lead the man astray. They blame their own weakness and utter lack of self control on the women, which places all of the responsibility on the women for merely existing, and none on the men for their behavior.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)men can't control themselves but place zero blame on the women so I don't see where they're blaming their lack of control on women at all. I still think it's ridiculous and I have no problem with Switzerland wanting to keep those who CAN'T or WONT assimilate out.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,684 posts)then they wouldn't be requiring women to cover up. There are many examples of this. For instance, orthodox Jewish women, upon marriage, wear wigs other in some way cover their hair. I've always understood that Orthodox Jews is that hair is considered erotic -- at least the hair of women -- and therefore shouldn't be seen. Meanwhile, aside from hair and body hiding, women are being covered up in various ways, including being sequestered in different parts of the houses of worship.
Again, I have always gotten the strong message in the situations where women have to cover up or hide, that *they* are the problem, it is their fault men can't control themselves. If these religions or groups actually believed it was the men, then they'd be placing restrictions on men, but they don't. The restrictions are entirely on the women.
And absolutely, someone who can't assimilate to the culture of Switzerland, doesn't belong. It's a shame that the headline simply mentions the handshake, which was actually the least of the problems with that couple. It also hasn't been clear, in what I've read, if they will be able to continue to live there, assimilated non citizens. Personally, I hope not, but that's not my decision to make.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)EllieBC
(2,953 posts)including to not make someone feel embarrassed.
JenniferJuniper
(4,493 posts)EX500rider
(10,448 posts)pnwmom
(108,915 posts)dalton99a
(80,907 posts)But there had been other reasons that justified their rejection, the statement went on.
During the hearing, this couple displayed a general discriminatory behaviour which was demonstrated by their refusal to answer questions posed by people of the opposite sex, it said.
Such an attitude does not respect a fundamental principle of our Constitution and a pillar of our society, namely equality between men and women. The Municipality noted that this couple did not meet the legal requirements and thus rejected their request.
The authorities added that according to federal and cantonal laws, candidates for naturalisation must be well integrated into the Swiss and Vaud community and show by their behaviour their attachment to Switzerland, its institutions and their respect for the Swiss legal order.
marble falls
(56,029 posts)I'd like to know now, I'm thinking of moving to Zurich.
I don't talk everyone or shake hands with everyone, I do not hug everyone and thankyou I do not need one right now, either. I'm not a bad citizen. I'm a Lutheran.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)John Fante
(3,479 posts)marble falls
(56,029 posts)or can't take care of themselves. The only thing they do or more correctly don't do is put their hands casually on the opposite sex. It also means they won't be taxing social systems by being drunks or drug addicts or the customers of of sex workers, etc.
At least I hope they determined that they wouldn't sometime before they found out the couple don't shake hands with members of the opposite sex. I mean if I were in charge of immigration policy I would have the drunk/drugged/criminal behaviors at a higher priority than handshake etiquette if it were even on the list.
I bet a lot of people of the opposite sex wish Harvey Weinstein would have been more like the Muslim couple.
Doodley
(8,972 posts)marble falls
(56,029 posts)TeamPooka
(24,123 posts)processing your application etc.
If people are unwilling to do that then I understand this rejection of citizenship.
marble falls
(56,029 posts)who goes to my wife's Methodist church on occasion, this being small town Texas - their musical presentations are pleasant entertainment (and she's in the choir).
TeamPooka
(24,123 posts)who were there to question them.
They would not answer their questions when asked as well as the other stuff.
It wasn't just a handshake.
marble falls
(56,029 posts)They had gotten past the talking thing, the specific thing that got them X'd was the mandatory congratulatory handshake which happens - I guess - at the ceremony. At that point someone jumped in with a "not only that, but" talking bit.
I'm changing my mind, I'm staying in the US. Heck with the stiff necked Swiss. Bet they like cheetolini, I hear he's a real handshake clown.
Doodley
(8,972 posts)Their own culture or tradition.
marble falls
(56,029 posts)and unknowingly gave it to you, would that be a 'basic courtesy' or 'enhanced courtesy'? A 'less than than basic courtesy'? Maybe a 'mixed courtesy'?
What if they didn't have hands? Rub noses? Air handshakes by the authorities?
What if they shook hands with the authorities just that one time only and then never did again, would that be grounds for revoking their citizenship? Wouldn't the EU get involved?
They treat others with more respect than is required and the Swiss don't want them?
Respect ...
Doodley
(8,972 posts)Not display one of the basic values of the modern world. If they have a cold or an infection, they should explain why they don't want to shake hands. These are very basic things most of us learn as children.
marble falls
(56,029 posts)the separation of men and women at worship. I was told that men and women were equal in Turkey and in front of Allah. I asked if that were so why was women's section behind the men in an inferior position. I was told that with Muslim worship and it bows, kneels, standing up getting back down there was too much temptation and distractions with women in front for all men to keep a clean mind and soul without temptations.
Turning this little thing into a serious affront to women - ALL women yet - trivializes the struggle women have made to still not have any sort of real equality.
Ask a single mother of three with a broken car, spotty child care, dead beat ex, crap job, customers and a boss with wandering hands at the Sports Bar how she would feel if because of religious reasons a man will absolutely not lay his hands on her or talk to her. I don't think she'll feel demeaned.
This is some trivial shit one on side of a balance with the lives of two ethical and moral people on the other. Give them their freaking citizenship for Pete's sake. Are they criminal? Do they pay taxes? Do legally care for themselves? Do they return the cart to the rack? Are they kind, do they rewind?
Doodley
(8,972 posts)Your host. If you are asked to take your shoes off before walking on the carpet, you should do it out of respect. If you won"t do that, you should leave. It is not relevant what one believes or what one has always done.
marble falls
(56,029 posts)culture. I don't try to make anyone touch me if they don't want.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handshake
Handshakes are known to spread a number of microbial pathogens. Certain diseases such as scabies are known to spread the most through direct skin-to-skin contact. A medical study has found that fist bumps and high fives spread fewer germs than handshakes.[1][2]
In light of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, the dean of medicine at the University of Calgary, Tomas Feasby, suggested that fist bumps may be a "nice replacement of the handshake" in an effort to prevent transmission of the virus.[3]
Following a 2010 study that showed that only about 40% of doctors and other health care providers complied with hand hygiene rules in hospitals, Mark Sklansky, a doctor at UCLA hospital, decided to test a "a handshake-free zone" as a method for limiting the spread of germs and reducing the transmission of disease.[17] However, UCLA didnt allow the ban of the handshakes outright, but they rather suggested other options like fist bumping, smiling, bowing, waving, and non-contact Namaste gestures.
This stupidity is international, it seems. From further down:
In June 2016, an Algerian woman married to a Frenchman took part in a naturalization ceremony (cérémonie daccueil dans la citoyenneté française[25]) in the Département where the couple lives. She refused to give a handshake to the prefect and to a local representative and claimed her religious faith would ban her from touching foreign men. Thereupon, she did not receive the French nationality. On 20 April 2017, Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve signed a decree approving that decision.[26] The Algerian woman filed a suit. On 11 April 2018, the Conseil d'État approved the decree.[27]
orleans
(33,949 posts)if a woman extends her hand to shake yours, do you hesitate? do you refuse to shake her hand?
if you met a couple and the husband extended his hand to shake yours would you shake his hand? and if so, would you then shake his wife's hand if she extended hers?
pennylane100
(3,425 posts)You seem to have missed the biggest obstacle in their denial of citizen. They refuse to interact with women in any capacity. Their behavior is an insult to all Swiss women. While their behavior was allowed in their own country, it is unspeakable to allow them to continue it in a country they would like to call home.
What does being a Lutheran have to do with antisocial, insulting and demeaning behavior toward women. I do not think that such it a a teaching of the Lutheran religion.
marble falls
(56,029 posts)its no insult to women. Its recognition of their own sinful nature. This is an ethical and moral issue for them. Expecting them to engage in a behavior that has real value like the ol' handshake trivializes their culture and Islam in general.
Being a Lutheran means more to me hopefully than you, though I would expect your tolerance for my being one.
May I inquire if you are a religious person?
pennylane100
(3,425 posts)That is an old English reply to an irrelevant question.
orleans
(33,949 posts)but it is obvious they aren't a good match for the swiss culture that apparently takes "a good cultural match" to heart when offering citizenship
i'm wondering why anyone with such a rigid gender belief system would want to live there
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)That's the issue here. Don't muddy the waters.
JI7
(89,151 posts)klook
(12,131 posts)According to justaskIslam, their faith forbids shaking hands or any other kind of touching with the opposite sex unless they're the person's spouse or family member.
Now, I happen to think that religious fundamentalism of any sort is ridiculous. However, if there's a policy to nix people's citizenship applications over something that is known to be a religious prohibition, this is a conscious plan to screen out that population.
Look forward to this becoming part of the American citizenship application process any day now.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)How are you supposed to be fully functional member of society if you can't speak to someone of the opposite sex?
Just because a fundamentalist religion requires some unhealthy treatment of women doesn't mean that Switzerland is deliberately trying to screen that religion out. It means that Switzerland is trying to screen out certain BEHAVIORS and to encourage others. The people practicing gender-based discrimination could, if they care about becoming Swiss citizens, decide to make accommodations themselves.
This is not about screening out MUSLIMS -- there are many Muslims here in the NW and I've never met any with the issues mentioned here. It's about screening out men and women, regardless of stated religious beliefs, who can't interact on an adult, equal basis with members of different sexes.
PatSeg
(46,559 posts)Whether we put religion before the laws of the land. If a person's religion is that important to them, then perhaps they are applying for citizenship to the wrong country. Separation of church and state is vital to democracy. I'm sure this couple knew this going in, but put their religious traditions first. They made their choice.
There are people of many different religions who occasionally have to make exceptions in order to live within the laws of their community or country. Freedom of religion does not mean one can break the law because their church disagrees.
barbtries
(28,689 posts)case in point the current VP of the USA.
at140
(6,110 posts)My best childhood (age 7-12) friend was Sayeed who lived 2 houses down the road. His family was devout Muslim, but there was no difference in behaviors of my non-Muslim family and his. His dad was insurance agent and my dad was a lawyer.
Later on in college in Mumbai, one could not tell what religion anyone belonged to. And I had friends who were Muslims, Sikhs, Parsi, Christian, and Hindu. None of us cared what religion anyone belonged to. I guess Mumbai is full of people adapted to cosmopolitan norms.
That may not be the case with people from Middle-East countries.
I tend to believe that it has more to do with where one is taught and who is doing the teaching more than the Muslim faith as a whole. It's the same with Christianity. One faith, many different denominations, many different trains of thoughts and methods. A couple examples, some places pass a collection plate, some don't, some require women to wear hats, some don't.
musette_sf
(10,182 posts)would also be denied citizenship. They practice the same sex segregation extremism.
If an applicant's treatment of women is considered to be socially unacceptable and/or illegal by the standards of the country in which he seeks citizenship, then is it right to admit him?
(And after I typed that, my mind just went to, "If a *president's treatment of women is considered to be socially unacceptable and/or illegal by the standards of the country in which he wields power, then is it right to let him continue?" )
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)But they aren't being banned because of a specific religion. They are being excluded because their chosen behaviors prevent them from entering into full citizenship in an egalitarian society.
https://forward.com/opinion/149365/when-women-cant-even-say-thank-you/
Common sense civility in the public sphere has yielded to the establishing and policing of boundaries. My 16-year-old daughter, naturally modest not just tznius in the sociological sense told me that when a man got on a local Jerusalem bus, finding her and a friend sitting in the mens section (the very language sounds like it belongs in the private sphere of a synagogue and not on a public bus), he pointed at them. He clicked his tongue a few times, then, with a waive of his hand, signaled them to the back of the bus.
The Shulchan Aruch, the Code of Jewish Law, affirms, All of our women are important, including, without doubt, my 16-year-old and her friend, yet that was certainly not reflected in the peremptory and entitled arrogance she met on the bus. True, some complain these days that the old language of chivalry objectifies women; but that chivalrous behavior is to be preferred to the dismissive treatment of women as objects who should move at the behest and slightest gesture even approach of a man. Without even taking into account the extreme behavior of harassment, assaults and public sphere violence, this is the other question that comes to mind: What happened to the respect for women for which Jewish men have been known for centuries?
SNIP
I do not want my girls constantly policing themselves, nor do I want to be surrounded by men who, in autocratic and arbitrary fashion, justify their discriminatory attitudes. I do want women, including my four daughters, to participate in the public sphere without fear.
Read more: https://forward.com/opinion/149365/when-women-cant-even-say-thank-you/
7962
(11,841 posts)This shit HAS to stop.
EllieBC
(2,953 posts)so my entire family and extended family, along with many I know casually will shake hands with members of the opposite sex if there is no way around it. Even if it's just to keep from embarrassing someone.
In a case like this I know of no Orthodox Jews who wouldn't have shaken hands. Being shomer negiah in a case like this would make no sense to any of them.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)The couple in the article wouldn't speak to the government's interviewers if they were the wrong gender.
EllieBC
(2,953 posts)to members of the opposite sex daily. Satmar and Bobov. With the exception of Ger (and I'm not even sure about them) and Toldos Aharon, I can't think of anyone chassidic or litvish who wouldn't speak to a member of the opposite sex. Especially in a business or government situation.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)but I did on the east coast -- and they didn't hesitate to speak, to anyone.
EllieBC
(2,953 posts)offend people at the same time (most of the time). No, there is no Orthodox Jew who would eat pork to make someone like them or feel better. But not shaking hands is not exactly Halacha. It's a geder. A fence, to keep you far from violating the actual law.
7962
(11,841 posts)Odd how people immigrated and assimilated for so many years until just recently.
We never had a problem with people actually trying to make female genital mutilation legal in the US until recent years; or other brutal beliefs. No, we dont have to "accept" everything.
My troll should be along soon....
cstanleytech
(26,027 posts)Doodley
(8,972 posts)Refused to shake hands with the female immigration officials, I would expect my applications to be rejected. Even though I am an atheist, I still said bless you.when she sneezed. When in Rome.... You do what you must do if you want to be accepted.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Heck, I did it this morning.
It's time to put these ridiculous ideas on the trash heap of history.
I respect the right of the Swiss to prioritize their respect for sexual equality or regressive religious ideas.
CatMor
(6,212 posts)come out of the dark ages to live in a equality based society.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)what about American fake christians who refuse to serve LGBTs?
Why should they be allowed to keep their citizenship?
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)We can't take it away as a punishment, though we can use other penalties. But we don't to make a problem worse by admitting more people who won't respect our values.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Another 'devil's advocate' question..And again, just for argument's sake, ....
about.. " we don't to make a problem worse by admitting more people who won't respect our values."
This then begs the question,WHO decides what our values are? You and I may agree on what these values are, but... then some racist, or anti-LGBTer, or anti- Muslim, or, or....group... may decide our values do not allow certain other people to come here.
There is a guy on my HOA board who is a strong trumper.... I need something better than "go fuck yourself, asshole,' (WHICH I used once) the next time an issue comes up.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)You'll need to talk to women in positions of power sometimes. You don't have to like LGBTs, but you can't kill them. Free speech is one of our most cherished values, even if that means someone insults Mohammed or Jesus.
If you can buy into a few basics like that, and are ready to work, why shouldn't we allow Muslims and Mexicans in?
CatMor
(6,212 posts)with the current political agenda those people are being backed up by judges making it lawful to do so in many cases. At least the Swiss are basing it on equality and I would hope for LGBT's also.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)Johnyawl
(3,205 posts)...and taking citizenship away from people is a whole lot more serious than denying citizenship to applicants.
For the fundy christians born and raised in this country - or western europe - the ground has shifted under their feet; it's thier country that has changed, and they're resisting that change. I can understand that attitude while at the same time fighting their resistance and demanding that they obey the law and adapt to the change.
But if you're a fundamentalist Muslim, Jew, Christian, Hindu, etc, why would you choose to become a citizen of a secular society? Why would you want to even live in a country you weren't born into that forces you to treat women as equals, and to tolerate LGBT?
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Maybe they EXPECT to be allowed to "behave' as they wish... because of the society to which they THINK they are moving..
qazplm135
(7,447 posts)there's a class of folks in extremist Christianity and Islam who believe in constant proselytizing and conversion as a spiritual mandate.
And if religion trumps everything in your life, you need to choose a theocracy, not a Western democracy.
Glorfindel
(9,701 posts)for citizenship. There are literally dozens of Muslim-majority nations that would, I'm sure, be happy to grant citizenship to this couple. Perhaps they should consider going there, where they can practice their religion and culture in perfect peace and freedom without having to struggle to answer questions from members of the opposite sex.
Devil Child
(2,728 posts)Pretty damn stupid of the couple to forsake offered Swiss citizenship due to a handshake.
uppityperson
(115,674 posts)pennylane100
(3,425 posts)he is doing the women of America a favor. We cannot kick out people with his views but we should do our best not to elect them to public office.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)It is one thing to deny citizenship but to go to the media. I'd keep these things confidential out of respect to applicants.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)Did you see them named in the article? It's not a violation of their privacy if they're not named.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)There could be like language barriers or something there isn't a lot of context here except for North Africa plus I'm well aware of anti-Muslim bias in Europe so I am not going to comment further. I just think it is wrong to discuss someone's application process to the press.
barbtries
(28,689 posts)provide the context. otherwise the headline remains muslims not allowed to be citizens.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)made it clear there was no language barrier. They could speak -- they simply refused to speak to someone of the opposite sex.
Snellius
(6,881 posts)the Swiss official should go to some kind of sensitivity training. He's the one showing disrespect by offending the rights of others. If Swiss custom dictated that women should pull down their pants, would not complying be a disrespect? That's what it would be like for her.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)Snellius
(6,881 posts)If someone doesn't want to shake my hand should I have them arrested? Sent to jail? Thrown out of the country? We're human beings before we're Americans, or Mongolians, or Swiss.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)They won't be able to take their place as full adults in an egalitarian society if they can't speak to people of a different sex.
Switzerland is fully within its rights to make that a condition of citizenship.
Snellius
(6,881 posts)Switzerland may be within its rights but their reasoning is not with the rights of man. Or common human decency. Have a heart. The main problem is that she's Muslim and doesn't speak or look like them. The Swiss have a valid interest in not letting people into their country but not for reasons like this.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)And it was not just the woman. The MAN refused to speak to a female interviewer.
This isn't about having a heart. It's about truly believing in an egalitarian society where women and men interact as EQUALS -- or not.
This would exclude members of multiple fundie religions, not just Muslims -- as long as those people refused to communicate as equals in the public sphere.
Snellius
(6,881 posts)Surprising that the Swiss official even cited it as a cause if the reasoning was just about cultural integration. It's not a big deal.
It's obviously much more complicated than that. It should never have been cited as an official reason or headlined by BBC. The immigrants' Muslim sect is extreme, even within their own religion, more than some sects of Hasidim in the US. But I assume that in their sect at some point, men have to communicate with women in some way. Within their community? Their family? It's a very abbreviated account of a social group that's much more unusual and complex. I'm curious where they lived before and why they sought to immigrate to Switzerland of all places. Still though, all people being perfect, the story from a non-nationalist, non-cultural-purity prejudice seems unfair. And Switzerland is not a country, like most European countries, where diversity is considered a favorable thing.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)Between love it and leave it, there is basic respect for the people already here.
barbtries
(28,689 posts)and at odds with gender equality.
dalton99a
(80,907 posts)Dutch Woman Denied Swiss Passport Because She Was 'Annoying' Will Get One After All
by Chelsea Stone
May 3, 2017
Her request for a passport was initially denied because she thought the town had too much cowbell.
Expatriating to a foreign land isn't exactly a new concept, but it seems one Swiss town has some unorthodox criteria for those looking to acquire a passport. Officials in Gipf-Oberfrick, about 45 minutes northwest of Zurich, rejected Dutch citizen Nancy Holten's request for a passport not once, but twice because the locals were "fed up" with her behavior. Holten's offending antics? Campaigning against the Swiss tradition of cowbells.
The 42-year-old Holten, who is a vegan and self-described freelance journalist, model, and drama student, has lived in Switzerland since she was eight years old and has children who are Swiss nationals, according to the Daily Mail. But she's earned a bad reputation with her village's residents by speaking out about the use of cowbells, which Holten said is damaging to the cows' health.
"I think I was too strident and spoke my mind too often," Holten told The Local. "Many people think that I am attacking their traditions. But that was not what it was about, it was never about that. What primarily motivated me about the cowbells was the animals' welfare."
Holten noted that the cowbells are very heavy and cause injury to the animals' skin, in addition to being extremely loud for something hanging so close to the cows' ears. The animal activist has also reportedly campaigned against other Swiss practices, including hunting, pig races, and the ringing of clamorous church bells.
In Switzerland, individual cantons and townsnot the federal governmentmake naturalization decisions, and attaining Swiss national status is notoriously difficult. Being born in Switzerland does not automatically entitle someone to Swiss citizenship. Tanja Suter, president of the local Swiss Peoples Party, said that Holten has a "big mouth" and town residents do not want her to become a citizen "if she annoys us and doesnt respect our traditions," reports Yahoo!.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)It gets boring in the Alps sometimes.
dalton99a
(80,907 posts)Bring your golf club
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)...then the spring melt will pretty much be sewage.
After they bring the cows down for the winter, theres a bunch of traditional ways of dealing with the higher altitude pasture cleanup.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)to the same extant we do.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)to people of a different gender as being a requirement of civilized society.
The people in the article refused to even speak to an interviewer of a different gender.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)Freedom of speech is an absolute value enshrined in our constitution to an extant that Europe just doesnt compare to. To wit, from the European Convention on Human rights:
The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals...
This caveat would never stand in a US court. Limiting speech on the basis of morals? Would be laughed out of court.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)is an extremely limited form of freedom of expression. Switzerland is well within its rights to require its new citizens to accept the idea of participating in an egalitarian society by being willing to SPEAK with people of a different sex.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)Yeah
Doodley
(8,972 posts)For example, have you ever had a conversation about Trump with a Trumpet? Americans aren't even able to talk to each other. The president calls all the media that does not agree with him "fake news" and at least one in three Americans seem to agree with him. A large minority still think climate change is a hoax and Obama wasn't born in America. We have Trump because too many are denied a voice and too few win by yelling the loudest. This is not an improvement on modern Europe.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)The right to expect that government will not interfere in your expressed or implied speech.
Those issues, while social problems, are outside the scope of government to solve afaiac.
Snellius
(6,881 posts)Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)But its not enshrined into their founding documents the way limited free speech is.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)not even to speak to anyone of the opposite gender, if that's what you're into. Cool!"
Switzerland: "We value egalitarianism, so don't apply for citizenship here unless you're willing to treat other people, regardless of gender, as your equal. Have a nice day -- but somewhere else!"
Pacifist Patriot
(24,647 posts)Oneironaut
(5,449 posts)We must pretend racism doesnt exist, despite seeing examples of racism everyday. If a minority tries to explain racism, whites shout them down so that the equality narrative can remain intact. Youre equal, damn it!
Sexism is still rampant, but men decide what is sexist and what isnt. Anyone who disagrees is a whiner looking to create trouble. If you point out the obvious, we as a country dont want to hear it.
We must permit all cultures to be misogynist, lest we be politically incorrect. We all agree its wrong - were just afraid to call them out on it (lest the armies of the perpetually offended on the internet ruin our lives). Its their beliefs, and all beliefs are created equal!
Everything is ok. EVERYTHING! If someone says otherwise, they clearly hate America!
ET Awful
(24,753 posts)Traditionally, a Jewish man or woman is not to touch a member of the opposite sex who is not their spouse or relative.
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1051760/jewish/May-I-Shake-the-Ladys-Hand.htm
If the answer is no, they would not treat the Jewish couple the same way, this action is impossible to interpret as anything other than anti-Muslim prejudice.
Pacifist Patriot
(24,647 posts)Yep, they sure would treat them the same way.
marybourg
(12,531 posts)about recent Jewish issues in Western Europe, ( e.g. proposed bans on circumcision and kosher slaughter, both on human/animal rights grounds), and my mothers world-view of the Swiss as more anti -Semitic than the Germans, a view hardened in her childhood, Id guess (and I emphasize the guess,) the answer is yes.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)LittleGirl
(8,247 posts)wearing a full burka meaning, only her eyes were showing. This was in France near the Switzerland border.
I'm as far left as the next woman but that shit has to end. I wanted to have my spouse pull over and rip that dang thing off her face. She was with her daughter who was wearing a hijab that was barely old enough for puberty. For me, it's a security risk to have someone cover up like that. And! I think women have been oppressed long enough.
Uncover yourself!
I know the Swiss are very tolerant, because there are a lot of expat/foreigners in Basel where I live and most of the muslim women here are very quiet and keep to themselves. But that woman with her whole face covered pissed me off. And it was near 90 degrees today. How safe is it for her to be covered in black in the heat? Just stop it. If you want to live like that, go east to a muslim countries that find that behavior acceptable.
Sorry to anyone that finds this shocking from me, but this happened about 4 hrs ago and I can't get over it.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)walking through Sears in front of me and behind her husband, while her school aged sons happily scampered about, speaking excellent, unaccented English (so they had been here long enough -- they weren't just visitors.)
Then the husband stood at the counter in the ladies' department, handling the transaction with the woman behind the counter, while his wife just lurked behind him.
It was CREEPY.
And you're right - those things are hot, obscure a woman's vision, and make it easier to trip. Also, if a woman is walking alone, even her OWN MOTHER wouldn't recognize her on the street -- so they're incredibly isolating.
I don't blame the European countries that have banned them -- not at all.
Doodley
(8,972 posts)Looking.like hookers just as bad. They dress like that because they want others to look at their bodies. When do we say our dress code is the example to follow?
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)My 57 year old wife is still hot. She often wears short shirts. And since Florida is hot often goes without a bra while wearing a blouse.
Looking like hookers for tempting weak men who do not see women as equals? And so she wants to show off her body. It is nice. Got a problem with that?
Fuck that shit and your misogynistic outlook.
You are on the wrong site. Why does the female body bother you more than the male?
Doodley
(8,972 posts)GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Who would tell a young girl she cant dress like her mother.
Doodley
(8,972 posts)Last edited Mon Aug 20, 2018, 05:16 PM - Edit history (2)
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Their teen daughters spent most of the time in bikinis.
Are you telling me that you are unable to deal with that?
They are cute and all, but since I am a married man in my 50s it would be pervy to allow myself to be attracted to them. Its what real men do.
Now my 57 year old wife in a bikini? Thats another story. I found her very attractive.
Mens inability to act like humans is no reason to dress women in tents. Change the fucking men.
Doodley
(8,972 posts)GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Or do you just do it as a hobby.
Doodley
(8,972 posts)and now after your talk about children in bikinis, for whatever reason, you imply I am the one using a strawman argument.
Marrah_Goodman
(1,586 posts)Most adults are completely capable of seeing a child in a bikini and not thinking "SEX". Those who are not belong in jail.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)And the way they dress is worse than women forced to cover themselves up.
A real piece of work. And on DU.
Doodley
(8,972 posts)GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Stating that a woman who does not dress to your sense of hyper modesty is somehow looking like a hooker is an opinion that deserves an insult on DU.
I still cant believe I read your post here.
msongs
(67,129 posts)Oneironaut
(5,449 posts)Imagine a hypothetical world where women in the US were forced to dress like they do on The Handmaids Tale. Imagine that, from birth, the idea is hammered into your head that women who dont dress like you do are sluts who invite sexual assault, or worse.
Now, imagine immigrating to Europe, which has the same culture as it does now. Do you still think the way you dress would be a choice, or, was your mind poisoned by dogma? Even worse, what if the husband you immigrated with thinks that God wants him to hurt or kill you if you try to dress differently?
christx30
(6,241 posts)immigrants, with the exception of refugees, from Giliad, given the current state of equality between the sexes. And I would hope they would have a zero tolerance toward women being trafficked as Handmaids. Like take the Handmaid to the side and given their freedom, and rifle butt to the face of anyone that objects. This continues until Giliad changes, or immigration from Giliad stops, knowing that the toxic parts of Giliad culture will not be tolerated.
The Handmaids get help in adjusting to life free of their families.
David__77
(23,170 posts)I think its fine to impose such a criterion.
rollin74
(1,952 posts)Igel
(35,173 posts)just one side of the story biased so many people from the start.
They weren't denied citizenship because they didn't shake hands. But a lot of people didn't read past that--or, if they did, that's all they understood or remembered. Some immediately, based on very partial information, formed a judgment about oppression and what social justice must be. Once formed, it's hard to get past those bad first assumptions.
They were denied citizenship because of a larger pattern of behavior, a portion of which was not shaking hands with people of the opposite sex, and probably because when asked they confirmed the attitudes and values that were expressed in that behavior pattern.
AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)if you dont respect your new countrys norms, this country is not for you. Swiss governement made a correct assesment that these people will have trouble or unable to respect and live equality. Once you become a citizen, feel free to do whatever you want cause now it is your country too. Assimilation should be a prioority for any well run immigration program.
nocoincidences
(2,188 posts)that fits the way you are comfortable behaving.
I'm not moving anywhere that treats women as untouchable.
My choice.
Did she really have a choice?
JCMach1
(27,540 posts)I had to conform to lots of norms I didn't believe in. This included things like enforced fasting during Ramadan... Much harder than a handshake...
So no, not sympathetic...
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)Go home!
JI7
(89,151 posts)mn9driver
(4,410 posts)Ive looked. Of course I am being discriminated against, even though I would walk in on day one as a productive and taxpaying member. I fail to meet other criteria that these countries consider important for new citizens to have.
Every country has a right to decide why and to whom they will grant citizenship. Their country, their constitution, their laws. These folks were given a test that the Swiss administered. They knew they were being tested since it is right there in the Swiss constitution. They failed it.
DFW
(53,933 posts)Plenty of people are allowed to reside in Switzerland for reasons of asylum, or other considerations.
If you apply for Swiss citizenship, you are asking to become Swiss, yourself. You are asking to become one of them. I am frequently in Switzerland, have Swiss friends, and speak three out of the four languages spoken there. I know the place well. A previous poster noted that to become a citizen, you have not only to convince the Federal authorities, but also the local community in which you intend to reside. You MUST interact with them on their terms. There is no other way to live there, and the last thing they want is someone coming to live among them who feels their customs are wrong.
I meet Muslims all the time in Switzerland who are immigrants and citizens. They chose to become Swiss. If they own a Swiss passport, they speak the local dialect of the Kanton they reside in, and do not refuse to speak to local authorities based on their gender. That is not the SWISS way. If a Swiss chooses to apply for citizenship in Egypt, they have to expect to adopt to the local language and culture there.
I was particularly amused about someone above suggesting that the EU get involved. Why not the OAS or ASEAN, or even the UN, or some other organization to which Switzerland does not belong?
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)They are fully within their rights to have their own rules to attain citizenship.
And they are fully within their rights to refuse citizenship if those rules are refused.
marybourg
(12,531 posts)is not tantamount to endorsing the behavior described in it and should not be the basis for a personal attack, which is against forum rules. Criticize the actions described in the posting, not the poster.
EX500rider
(10,448 posts)....stupid rules many religions have. And fully support the Swiss in their attempt to keep their country free of such nonsense.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)That wasn't really clear.
If you want Swiss citizenship you follow their rules.
It is not racism or bias in any way.
Raine
(30,520 posts)so disrespectful to the citizens of a country you claim you want to be a citizen of.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)Utter fake outrage.
Apply for citizenship that does not require a handshake.
It is no person's birthright to be Swiss unless you were born there.
WestIndianArchie
(386 posts)EX500rider
(10,448 posts)WestIndianArchie
(386 posts)antongorlin
(1 post)There are some more important things about a person rather than how they used to live and if they feel comfortable about the opposite sex. The grounds for refusal are a bit off imo.