NationStates Jolt Archive

They're being told that they shouldn't wear symbols of their religion, and that the women should wear abayas and possibly headscarves.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/09/nbmi09.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/01/09/ixhome.html

Perhaps they should sue the airline for not respecting their own religious customs.

Fucking crazy Fundamentalist ruled Saudi Arabia:mad:

They're being told that they shouldn't wear symbols of their religion, and that the women should wear abayas and possibly headscarves.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/09/nbmi09.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/01/09/ixhome.html

Perhaps they should sue the airline for not respecting their own religious customs.
These are flights mostly serving Saudis, no? (unless there are significant numbers of non-Saudis travelling there...which would still mostly be Muslims going on the haj anyway...). Most flights I've been on that serve a particular group tend to alter their language/dress/demeanor to reflect that group. I don't see the problem, really...though you'd think the flight attendants could at least wear their crucifixes under their clothes.

These are flights mostly serving Saudis, no? (unless there are significant numbers of non-Saudis travelling there...which would still mostly be Muslims going on the haj anyway...). Most flights I've been on that serve a particular group tend to alter their language/dress/demeanor to reflect that group. I don't see the problem, really...though you'd think the flight attendants could at least wear their crucifixes under their clothes.
Saudi brings in alot of non-Muslim guestworkers. These people may be technicians who keep Saudi airlines and computer systems running, engineers and architects who build Saudi buildings, et cetera. Fact is that Saudis don't fill most of their job openings, especially the highly technical ones, domestically. There may be alot of non-Muslims going to jobs or comming home from jobs on those planes.

Saudi brings in alot of non-Muslim guestworkers. These people may be technicians who keep Saudi airlines and computer systems running, engineers and architects who build Saudi buildings, et cetera. Fact is that Saudis don't fill most of their job openings, especially the highly technical ones, domestically. There may be alot of non-Muslims going to jobs or comming home from jobs on those planes.
Ah well...there were plenty of non-Spanish speaking people on my flights within Peru (German, French and English mostly), but the attendants still spoke Spanish. Now, if the flight was international, I'd expect them to speak the language of the country they were servicing. As for headscarves...what's the big deal?

Ah well...there were plenty of non-Spanish speaking people on my flights within Peru (German, French and English mostly), but the attendants still spoke Spanish. Now, if the flight was international, I'd expect them to speak the language of the country they were servicing. As for headscarves...what's the big deal?
Bothers me that the flight attendents and pilots need to sacrifice their religious beliefs but nobody expects a Saudi to do the same under any circumstances.

Then again...it's kind of a religious symbol...I wouldn't expect Muslim attendants (for example) servicing a Christian nation (it'd have to be an actual blend of Church and State though) to wear crucifixes...

...I'd wear the headscarf.

Beeing forced to wear a head scarf is a big deal...:headbang:

Beeing forced to wear a head scarf is a big deal...:headbang:
Well...they're getting paid for it, don't they? Think of it as a sort of uniform...hell...I'd prefer wearing that headscarf to some of the other uniforms I've seen on board...

Beeing forced to wear a head scarf is a big deal...:headbang:
Then work somewhere else. Transfers were offered.

I don't see why we have to get mad over it. I mean, if it's a custom, we all should respect it.

Well...they're getting paid for it, don't they? Think of it as a sort of uniform...hell...I'd prefer wearing that headscarf to some of the other uniforms I've seen on board...

Well, they are getting payed to be on that airline, but if you are offended bye the fact that women show their hair then you ought to be out in a mental institution.

Saudi-Arabia is a sick twisted place, most of the manual Labur is done by people from the rest of the middle east. High tech is done by people from Europe and US. And they threat their manual labur other country arabs like cattle. They treat their women like cattle.


Saudia Arabia ought to me nuked!!!;)

Well, they are getting payed to be on that airline, but if you are offended bye the fact that women show their hair then you ought to be out in a mental institution.

Saudi-Arabia is a sick twisted place, most of the manual Labur is done by people from the rest of the middle east. High tech is done by people from Europe and US. And they threat their manual labur other country arabs like cattle. They treat their women like cattle.


Saudia Arabia ought to me nuked!!!;)

That was the most ridiculous, close-minded, one-sided, uneducated, idiotic, racial and narrow thing anyone could say.

Sorry, but it is.

How was it racial

How was it raciel
So you admit it was the most ridiculous, close-minded, one-sided, uneducated, idiotic, BUT NOT racial, and narrow thing anyone could say?:D

Well, they are getting payed to be on that airline, but if you are offended bye the fact that women show their hair then you ought to be out in a mental institution.

Saudi-Arabia is a sick twisted place, most of the manual Labur is done by people from the rest of the middle east. High tech is done by people from Europe and US. And they threat their manual labur other country arabs like cattle. They treat their women like cattle.


Saudia Arabia ought to me nuked!!!;)
http://www.sauduction.com/welcome.html

Have fun reading this site.

Well, they are getting payed to be on that airline, but if you are offended bye the fact that women show their hair then you ought to be out in a mental institution.

Saudi-Arabia is a sick twisted place, most of the manual Labur is done by people from the rest of the middle east. High tech is done by people from Europe and US. And they threat their manual labur other country arabs like cattle. They treat their women like cattle.


Saudia Arabia ought to me nuked!!!;)
That was uncalled for and shows a complete ignorance on your part concerning other cultures and values.

http://www.sauduction.com/welcome.html

Have fun reading this site.
The Brits don't have the same sort of weird incestuous relationship with the Saudis as you yanks do, do they?

That was uncalled for and shows a complete ignorance on your part concerning other cultures and values.

What culture did i offend might i ask?

You know, there was these people from somewhere in the middle east that went to saudi arabia to work, they were treted nice!
Yes beaten up, raped. These were girls working as maids...

Saudi arabia is morally corrupt, and it makes me wanna puke

What culture did i offend might i ask?

You know, there was these people from somewhere in the middle east that went to saudi arabia to work, they were treted nice!
Yes beaten up, raped. These were girls working as maids...

Saudi arabia is morally corrupt, and it makes me wanna puke
How about the Saudi-Arabian one?
Saudi-Arabia is a sick twisted place
and I'm sure quite a few muslims won't be happy with this one either:
but if you are offended bye the fact that women show their hair then you ought to be out in a mental institution.

And come on... 'these people' from 'somewhere' in the middle east... you didn't find any more specific example?

How about the Saudi-Arabian one?
Thats like saying that Germanys culture is Nazi, and that you can't offend that so not to offend germans.
Forcing women to wear scarfs is quite evil in my book


and I'm sure quite a few muslims won't be happy with this one either:


I think that any normal muslim won't be happy that he is linked to Saudi Arabia, or its present day way of handling things.



And come on... 'these people' from 'somewhere' in the middle east... you didn't find any more specific example?
Don't know where they were from

Hmmm, I'm a bit torn on this one. I certainly tend to find more justification in an employer requiring extra clothing than in an employer (that isn't a strip club, etc.) requiring employees to remove garments they must wear to feel modest and comfortable.

I guess I can see why the wearing of the robes or headscarf could be justified by the airline. In a culture in which women are considered to be immodest (slutty, as it were) if their hair is not covered, the airline has an interest in maintaining a good relationship with its customers, and bad opinions of the staff could reflect upon the airline as a whole. I don't know of any sets of beliefs that would forbid the wearing of extra garments, and those who feel uncomfortable with it were certainly given an out.

On the other hand, I see no justification for the banning, specifically, of religious jewelry. First of all, unless we are talking about a huge crucifix here, the jewelry is hardly going to be noticeable, especially if wearing dress that would be considered modest in Saudi Arabia. Of course, by that token, someone who wanted to wear such a necklace, for personal reasons, could do so and it is unlikely that the supervisors would even notice. One way or another, if they are going to ban jewelry with a religious theme, they should probably just ban jewelry in general. I would still find the measure unnecessary, but at least it wouldn't be discriminatory.

Saudi Arabia actually is a shite place. And I don't see why British Airways should capitulate to Saudi customs.
I don't see why we have to get mad over it. I mean, if it's a custom, we all should respect it. Yes, so why do we take away the eeeeevil idolatrous crucifixes from the staff?

There's a whole lot of money in saudi arabia, and BA wants as much of it as it can get.

Thats like saying that Germanys culture is Nazi, and that you can't offend that so not to offend germans.


Sorry... what?

Forcing women to wear scarfs is quite evil in my book

Forcing? Has it never even occurred to you that they might have thought something other than 'mwahaha! we're gonna make them wear eeevil scarfs! mwhahahaha!!' when they first came up with the idea?
What about 'forcing' a women to take the name of her husband? (while we're at weird comparisons).
Geez, I know exactly that no matter what I'll say you wouldn't understand where I'm coming from. We're just too different in our thinking and our way of looking at the world around us. (Not meant in an offensive kind of way. It's just a statement.)

I think that any normal muslim won't be happy that he is linked to Saudi Arabia, or its present day way of handling things.

... that's just too vague to even bother answering.

Don't know where they were from
Same goes for this.

Sorry... what?

Forcing? Has it never even occurred to you that they might have thought something other than 'mwahaha! we're gonna make them wear eeevil scarfs! mwhahahaha!!' when they first came up with the idea?
What about 'forcing' a women to take the name of her husband? (while we're at weird comparisons).
Geez, I know exactly that no matter what I'll say you wouldn't understand where I'm coming from. We're just too different in our thinking and our way of looking at the world around us. (Not meant in an offensive kind of way. It's just a statement.)

... that's just too vague to even bother answering.

Same goes for this.


Are you Saudi then? Where are you from?

And in Europe I don't think women are forced to take the name of their husband. A lot keep their own last name after the wedding thingy

They're being told that they shouldn't wear symbols of their religion, and that the women should wear abayas and possibly headscarves.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/09/nbmi09.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/01/09/ixhome.html

Perhaps they should sue the airline for not respecting their own religious customs.
The company is altering its dress code in order to improve profitability in a specific line. I don’t see this as any worse then requiring a uniform at work.

Hmmm, I'm a bit torn on this one. I certainly tend to find more justification in an employer requiring extra clothing than in an employer (that isn't a strip club, etc.) requiring employees to remove garments they must wear to feel modest and comfortable.

I guess I can see why the wearing of the robes or headscarf could be justified by the airline. In a culture in which women are considered to be immodest (slutty, as it were) if their hair is not covered, the airline has an interest in maintaining a good relationship with its customers, and bad opinions of the staff could reflect upon the airline as a whole. I don't know of any sets of beliefs that would forbid the wearing of extra garments, and those who feel uncomfortable with it were certainly given an out.

On the other hand, I see no justification for the banning, specifically, of religious jewelry. First of all, unless we are talking about a huge crucifix here, the jewelry is hardly going to be noticeable, especially if wearing dress that would be considered modest in Saudi Arabia. Of course, by that token, someone who wanted to wear such a necklace, for personal reasons, could do so and it is unlikely that the supervisors would even notice. One way or another, if they are going to ban jewelry with a religious theme, they should probably just ban jewelry in general. I would still find the measure unnecessary, but at least it wouldn't be discriminatory.


Agreed … specially if the company allowed workers to work for other flight plans to destinations that were not so touchy about customs like that.

Simply it is a work dress code, one the company think will make a difference in profits. How is this any worse then any other work dress code

The company is altering its dress code in order to improve profitability in a specific line. I don’t see this as any worse then requiring a uniform at work.
Forced to have scarfs, would you like to be forced to have a huge sikh turban forced at you at work if you were not siikh?

Are you Saudi then? Where are you from?

And in Europe I don't think women are forced to take the name of their husband. A lot keep their own last name after the wedding thingy
Not quite. A little more to the north. And then some. (Switzerland)
I'll insist on the name thing, though. It just seems normal to us (of course there are some who'll go through the extra paperwork and the bewildered looks of their close married friends to keep their maiden name...but you also see Muslim women without a scarf now don't you?).

Forced to have scarfs, would you like to be forced to have a huge sikh turban forced at you at work if you were not siikh?
Yup so if that makes you un-comfortable for a private company to require that do not work there.

Yup so if that makes you un-comfortable for a private company to require that do not work there.
No shiite. Hahahaha.

No shiite. Hahahaha.
I mean that is like saying wearing a shirt does not make me comfortable at work so my employers should not require shirts … its silly.

BTW that got a groan out of me lol

It's just a tad ironic that they'll ban religious symbols and then make one mandatory.

Not quite. A little more to the north. And then some. (Switzerland)
I'll insist on the name thing, though. It just seems normal to us (of course there are some who'll go through the extra paperwork and the bewildered looks of their close married friends to keep their maiden name...but you also see Muslim women without a scarf now don't you?).
Yeah but they don't live in Saudi Arabia buy the way..
I am bosnian, i have to ask are you an "etnich" swiss, couse you said, you don't know where I am from, and I tought that you then implayed that you were from Saudi Arabia

It's just a tad ironic that they'll ban religious symbols and then make one mandatory.

Ironic, opressive sounds better:rolleyes:
A huge crusefix might offends someone, but I dought it was that big..

Anyways to ban all religious symbols is okey in my book.
But to ban only one type is opressive

Yeah but they don't live in Saudi Arabia buy the way..
I am bosnian, i have to ask are you an "etnich" swiss, couse you said, you don't know where I am from, and I tought that you then implayed that you were from Saudi Arabia
No no, that's not what I meant. ...but seen as I don't know what you mean by 'ethnic Swiss' we're square :p
I'm assuming it means something along the lines of 'real' swiss? I guess I am.

Ironic, opressive sounds better:rolleyes:
A huge crusefix might offends someone, but I dought it was that big..

Anyways to ban all religious symbols is okey in my book.
But to ban only one type is opressive
You've got that right. I say ban 'em all.

No no, that's not what I meant. ...but seen as I don't know what you mean by 'ethnic Swiss' we're square :p
I'm assuming it means something along the lines of 'real' swiss? I guess I am.

OK just wondering, couse I didn't see why this Europeen dude would be so defencive of a in my eyes wacho wahabi edition of islam...

Forced to have scarfs, would you like to be forced to have a huge sikh turban forced at you at work if you were not siikh?

From the point of view of such a conservative culture, asking employees to wear headscarves is no different than a company in Europe or the US asking women not to wear mini-skirts, or to

It's just a tad ironic that they'll ban religious symbols and then make one mandatory.

This may seem a bit pedantic, but a head-scarf is not a religious symbol any more than a bra or a long skirt is. It is a garment that some cultures (including some Christian ones *gasp*) see as being necessary for modesty, just as a woman who did not wear a bra under her t-shirt or wore a miniskirt in this country would not be seen as being modestly dressed.

It's just a tad ironic that they'll ban religious symbols and then make one mandatory.
Though the head cover is not quite the same as something like a cross … it is more of a modesty thing then just a symbol.

While I understand comparing something intended for modesty to something that is more on the lines of a “charm” is hardly fair to either

lol

people make me laugh

If someone is offended by what an airline wears or that you will see womens hair in other countries don't fly with that airline or to that country in the first place!

If I am a conservative puritan christian I am not goign to take the Hooters flight to LA and browse the playboy mansion.

but on the same token, if you can't follow the company dress code that is required when you are on a flight to Saudi arabia, then don't work that flight. It's not like you lose your job over not wanting to work that flight.

So both sodes need to shut up as far as I see it.

I can see how a company might want to do what it can not to offend certain passengers by trying to make their trip more comfortable and it's pretty lame not to expect an airline to do what it can to minimize problems with passengers. They are in it to make money and avoid conflicts I'm sure.

What's all the fuss? Granted the crucifex issue is over the top. But hey wear them under your cloths. I doubt the Saudis will be strip searching women.

As to the scarf and the abaya robes? It's a reasonable request if they are going to wondering around Riyadh.

Common misconception: The hijab is not a religious symbol.

It is not required any more than it is required of Christians to wear a cross around their neck.

Common courtesy: When you go into a place where there are a lot of a certain kind of people, it's a good idea to respect their customs.

Would all of this objection be raised if it were requiring the removal of shoes in the Japanese tradition - which *does* have spiritual meaning? How about if it were primarily Jewish flights and the male flight attendants were told to wear kippot - even though that is no more a religious symbol than hijab?

Why is simple common courtesy so difficult for so many people to grasp?

Another common misconception: Muslims are not offended when a woman shows her hair and it does not show a woman to be "slutty". Hijab is a woman's choice, just as a beard (part of the man's hijab) is a man's choice.

I'll leave it with that.

Another common misconception: Muslims are not offended when a woman shows her hair and it does not show a woman to be "slutty". Hijab is a woman's choice, just as a beard (part of the man's hijab) is a man's choice.

I agree with this in principle and I am certain that it is true of most Muslims. However, there are countries where it is not the woman's choice, especially not if she is a citizen of the country. In many such places, it is perfectly legal for a man to walk up and fondle a woman who isn't dressed "properly" (if it isn't one of the countries where she is simply arrested on sight) and she has no recourse.

At the very least, in such places, a woman not wearing hijab would be seen as immodest - which often translates (in the minds of some) into "slutty".

I agree with this in principle and I am certain that it is true of most Muslims. However, there are countries where it is not the woman's choice, especially not if she is a citizen of the country.

True! And for this, blame the culture, not the religion. Saudi is a strange bizarro-world like place. A last hold out monarchy/patriarchy in a world of reform and progressive thought.

We can be indignant and express our outrage and shake our collective fingers at the Saudi ruling class, but it will never work. Nuking them, as some suggest, will never work. As long as they have all the money and control, there is nothing that can be done.

A global Muslim ban on Hajj for a few years would help. Refusing Hajj until Saudi Arabia abolishes the Kingdom. But it would take a billion Muslim strong movement. I have a few other ideas along those lines, but who knows what can happen. It's all speculation.

Anyway ... that said .... back to hijab ....

In some Christian cultures - Russian Orthodox comes to mind - women cover their hair for modesty purposes. This, like the Muslim tradition, comes from the Jewish tradition.

I find it awfully strange that nobody seems to mind that in every depiction of the Jewish Queens and the Virgin Mary, she is wearing hijab, but if a Muslim woman does it, it's because she's repressed and controlled by Islam.

True! And for this, blame the culture, not the religion. Saudi is a strange bizarro-world like place. A last hold out monarchy/patriarchy in a world of reform and progressive thought.

We can be indignant and express our outrage and shake our collective fingers at the Saudi ruling class, but it will never work. Nuking them, as some suggest, will never work. As long as they have all the money and control, there is nothing that can be done.

A global Muslim ban on Hajj for a few years would help. Refusing Hajj until Saudi Arabia abolishes the Kingdom. But it would take a billion Muslim strong movement. I have a few other ideas along those lines, but who knows what can happen. It's all speculation.

Anyway ... that said .... back to hijab ....

In some Christian cultures - Russian Orthodox comes to mind - women cover their hair for modesty purposes. This, like the Muslim tradition, comes from the Jewish tradition.

I find it awfully strange that nobody seems to mind that in every depiction of the Jewish Queens and the Virgin Mary, she is wearing hijab, but if a Muslim woman does it, it's because she's repressed and controlled by Islam.
I think covering yourself up because of some idea that it pleases your god, or is respectful is frankly a bit silly and backwards. Jews, Christians, Muslims, whatever.

Religion makes people do some really strange stuff. I wish people would wake the hell up, and realize that how you treat people is far more important than what your wearing while you do it, or where and how often you "pray"

True! And for this, blame the culture, not the religion. Saudi is a strange bizarro-world like place. A last hold out monarchy/patriarchy in a world of reform and progressive thought.

Oh, I agree. As I said earlier, hijab being required for modesty is a cultural issue, not a religious one. But I can see where the airline wouldn't want to offend their customers, even if most people elsewhere in the world think their customers are wrong.

In some Christian cultures - Russian Orthodox comes to mind - women cover their hair for modesty purposes. This, like the Muslim tradition, comes from the Jewish tradition.

I find it awfully strange that nobody seems to mind that in every depiction of the Jewish Queens and the Virgin Mary, she is wearing hijab, but if a Muslim woman does it, it's because she's repressed and controlled by Islam.

Interesting, isn't it? I've known more than one Muslim woman who chose to wear hijab, without being at all repressed. In fact, these were very headstrong women I met at college, one of them one of the best writers (fond of writing editorials that actually make people think about something, isntead of just ranting) at the school newspaper. I haven't known women of other cultures personally who wore them, but I remember mentioning that it was common among the Eastern sects of Christianity and a woman on this board once pointed out that she would not feel comfortable in public, especially in church, without it.

Religion makes people do some really strange stuff. I wish people would wake the hell up, and realize that how you treat people is far more important than what your wearing while you do it, or where and how often you "pray"

And that's your opinion and I respect it. I don't even think it strange.

However, if God didn't care how often or how we prayed, God wouldn't have given us instructions. That's just my take on it.

It's sort of like my not eating pork. God said not to eat it. I didn't create it, so it isn't mine to make decisions for, hence, I won't eat it.

What you do is your business. Enjoy your bacon. I don't care and I don't think it "strange" and I'd never call you "silly" or "backwards" for doing so.

Happy Birthday, by the way. If she's still alive, send your mother flowers.

I think covering yourself up because of some idea that it pleases your god, or is respectful is frankly a bit silly and backwards. Jews, Christians, Muslims, whatever.

What about personal comfort? Should we all go around naked because covering yourself up is silly? I would be awfully uncomfortable in public naked, or in a miniskirt and tank top, for that matter.


Happy Birthday, btw.

They're being told that they shouldn't wear symbols of their religion, and that the women should wear abayas and possibly headscarves.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/09/nbmi09.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/01/09/ixhome.html

Perhaps they should sue the airline for not respecting their own religious customs.

Meh.

Is it suprising that a business wishes to cater to its customers? No.

Do you have a right to dress however you like on the job? No.

I'd prefer the airline be more progressive towards its employees, but I am not suprised it would rather please its customers.

Much ado about nothing.