Separate swimming times for women based on religion.

[Karhunkoski]

The logic behind the programme is that children from all backgrounds should have the possibility to retain their cultural roots.

Yes they should, but at the taxpayer's expense? What's wrong the family providing the connection to "cultural roots". We built our own sauna and baked our own Karelian pies when I was a kid, nobody stepped in to help, and we didn't expect them to.

And then they just leave anyway, great! >

Maybe one day those children will want to go and work in their "home" country,

The problem is that the government social policy makers contain too many liberal flowerhats (all the real high flyers go into industry). These do-gooders just fall over eachother trying to appear culturally sensitive. But just end up helping to create parallel societies with their own social problems to solve (as we see in other parts of Europe).


Sensible Integration - YES

Parallel Societies - NO

[Rick1]

The problem is that the government social policy makers contain too many liberal flowerhats (all the real high flyers go into industry). These do-gooders just fall over eachother trying to appear culturally sensitive. But just end up helping to create parallel societies with their own social problems to solve (as we see in other parts of Europe).


Sensible Integration - YES

Parallel Societies - NO

There are two sides as usual: there are many finns who went abroad after their education here, but they mostly come back when they get children because of the daycare and better living environment here. For the policy makers: fortunately they have 4 months of holiday

Onkko hit the nail on the head; we were so much against apartheid but some people would like to reinforce it via religion here in 'free' europe.

[sammy]

Sensible Integration - YES

Parallel Societies - NO

KK, I fully agree - even though it could be argued that there are much weightier problems in our society that could create "parallel societies" than some individual swimming halls allowing a few s*dding hours per week to be reserved for 'immigrants'. I don't mind that much if it's paid from "my" (tax-payer's) money, some of that goes anyway to ends that I do not strictly speaking "like" or directly profit from.

Be as it may, I'd be interested to hear what would happen if, say, a Finnish woman would wander in by mistake at these so-called separate hours. Would she be thrown out? How can they know for sure whether one is a Muslim or not - do they have a test at the door that you have to pass? After all, the crux of the argument here is that religion should not be the factor. It's easy to check whether you're a woman... whether you are an immigrant, depends... but religion?

Anyway what will they expect next? Jobs at companies where the official language is Eng... sorry, some other language? YLE news services in some other language than Finnish and Swedish? Their own pub quiz nights?

[onkko]

The children are taught in school (ie no incremental expense for the classrooms) and the teachers are usually immigrants themselves (which boosts employment amongst immigrants).

So workers who arent needed without program somehow doesnt cost anything or are cheap? "Multicultural" schooling costs about 25% more than normal and all those immigrant language teachers who arent hired because of need like english teachers are are in fact burden to society.
How much demand you see on urdu or such languages? And how in hell someone hired by goverment making goverment invented work is somehow cheap and how that helps at all on main problem what is tax money (hint, teacher is using not creating money).

[network_engineer]

Hi all,

Might I opine humbly on this. Let me take the case of India as an example, since I have lived there and can speak of it:

India has over 26 OFFICIAL languages, and over 38 languages widely spoken. Not to mention over 386 dialects that overstates the word dialect. In fact, some dialects, you cannot even understand others. And only FYI, the unifying language there is English, which is why it has been said that there are more English speakers in India than the rest of the world.

Now, imagine if the state of Finland had to provide teaching for all these languages? And I remember one idiot (presumably of Indian origin, and who surprising was not even supported by the Indians themselves) from Vantaa, who during the last municipal elections campaigned for teaching the parents mother tongue in school. He was campaigning because his was the only family that spoke that language and could not even gather enough students to get the city to pay. I could assume his pocket is getting lighter and ego hit hard! His masked argument was: Trade with India is growing heavily and it would be easier if Finland had native speakers in that language. My counter to him and his cohorts in clear language: !"#¤%! Any company in India worth 10 cents [yeah worth 10 cents] and who exports products abroad have staff who are fluent in English, if not also the language of the country they are trading with. This was a mask to make sure his pockets does not get lighter.

Let's take this into perspective: Let's include also China, Africa. In China, each province has a certain dialect that affects, although not radical. Africa, each country has its language and then again dialects that are not even compatible in grammar (or so I am told). Expect the state to pay for it ALL? And still have good health care, day care facilities for children, etc. Like I mentioned, my tax monies can be put to better use, child-care, health care and general improvement of society, maintenance of public services. No interest whatsoever in propagating an "alien" [pun intended] culture.

Does that mean I do not support language of languages? Certainly not. I am all for it. Finland is part of the EU and thus I support teaching of European languages. I support teaching of languages, and then again, depending on market factors.

As regards helping the development of other countries: Finland as a country is responsible and doing its share of charity through responsible channels. And I don't believe that such actions or any such fiscal actions are going to help these countries as long as they are not willing to help themselves.

---
Now, it is wrong to classify that immigrants have special needs. To answer this question, one needs to look at WHO are immigrants. By and large, when immigrants are referred to, they are largely talking about immigrants from third world countries and particularly, countries with "governments and people with steadfast ideals". And I do mean "steadfast ideals" in a sarcastic manner. Immigrants are anybody who moves in who is not a native, starting from Sweden to USA, Canada, all the way to South American countries and then the countries to the East. Why do I not see my German/French/American/Colombian friends NOT demanding the state to pay for their cultural needs and similar rubbish. I don't mean to be-little another's culture, but use the word "rubbish" here only because of the irrational demands they make on the state.

Straight said: Have some pride, keep your honour, and pay your individual needs from your own pocket. Wait! I can't ask them to do that, since most of these [such immigrants] claim that their honour is maintained between the legs of their daughters, wives and sisters! Subtly said!

Taking even the case of the swimming pool: Why is it that immigrant women from India, China, Philippines, Thailand, and countries like Ghana, Nigeria, etc. do NOT have these "special" requirements for swimming and they can swim without any issues with the rest of the crowd at the pool? My implication is very clear! As far as I know, we are the only people with non-Finnish roots in this village. Shall I then demand that the swimming pool be reserved for my wife? Leave anything aside, my wife will kick my butt for that. This statement from the Deputy Ombudsman is giving preference based on religion, something as I understand, forbidden by the constitution. I suspect that all the details were not presented to the Ombudsman or then masked under polite intents! I wonder why he did not even catch the simple fact that segregation is NOT integration.

The other thing about encouraging development of kids in two cultures leads to an identity problem. Take a look at the recent spate of events in the UK. I am all for multi-cultural-ism e.g. when it comes to the positive side, e.g. food, or those that do not lead to a clash. If the culture clashes, then assimilate.

[pierrot]

The children are taught in school (ie no incremental expense for the classrooms) and the teachers are usually immigrants themselves (which boosts employment amongst immigrants).

So workers who arent needed without program somehow doesnt cost anything or are cheap? "Multicultural" schooling costs about 25% more than normal and all those immigrant language teachers who arent hired because of need like english teachers are are in fact burden to society.
How much demand you see on urdu or such languages? And how in hell someone hired by goverment making goverment invented work is somehow cheap and how that helps at all on main problem what is tax money (hint, teacher is using not creating money).

Hint: Teachers are a medium to long term investment. So of course they cost in the short term, but this is by far outweighed later on by the benefits.
If you save in children education, it will cost you much more in the long term as it is easier and cheaper to teach kids something then adults.

[ajdias]

Are these separate swimming times for women during normal pool opening times?
Doesn't seem fair to prevent users access during normal times.

Otherwise, as long as there is no religious segregation seems that the benefits outweigh the costs.

Edit: article on HS

• Teemu Raatikainen, the head of the Jakomäki public pool, says that Finns have also come to the pool during Muslims-only hours.
  He notes that it is not possible to check up on a customer’s religious affiliation.
  “We have not asked about it. We have trusted that customers know what times they are coming to.
  
  The decision to reserve specific times for Muslim women was a controversial one in Jakomäki.
  “In principle, there is no impediment to common times for swimming. The woman’s religion is of no consequence. Islam teaches that a Muslim woman must not be naked in front of another woman”, says Pia Jardi of the Finnish Islamic Council.

[network_engineer]

Nobody is asking to save on children's education. The Finnish system provides for very good education. There are still who prefer to send their kids to some private schools and pay for it themselves.

What the society is against is: Manipulation of the system by the likes of some of these, forcing the state to pay for something that they should be paying for from their own. After all, if the issue is so dear to them, pay for it from your own pockets. Very often it is not even about education, it is about ego and arrogance that they carry around, not to mention imposition on the children, i.e. forcing the children to be as they would have been if they were in the [NOT] great and mighty land that they parents come from which is now torn and broken because of the same values that they are trying to imbibe!

PS: Added later, I personally known one person teaching an Indian language, although she herself has not training in the language, can speak it but not in a knowledgeable manner, but yes, they need additional income. What better wool to pull over the authority than to provide "language" teaching in the form of story telling in the native language!

[Karhunkoski]

Made me think a bit network_engineer

It really makes one wonder about the language training system, and how it receives and justifies its funding. The subject of how ineffective the Finnish language training is has been beaten to death, proved in point by it currently being under comprehensive review by the authorities. But to focus the point...

Now the Jyväskylä immigrants language training programme has to run extra groups called "ABC groups" to teach those immigrants who cannot even read and write in their own language. This is quite a barrier to learning Finnish. The other barrier is the fact that many of these are near to, or at, pensionable age. Their chances of employment in the future are nil (admited by their own peers). Reasons for this range from age, to lack of Finnish language skill, and even encompass cultural aspects, because many of these immigrants are women who have spent 60 years being told that their place is at home. They've sort of got used to the idea, and are unlikely to be seen in the morning, getting into the car and trotting off to work in the Sokos menswear department.....

So here's the suggestion:

Stop wasting money teaching Finnish to this group of people. They don't speak it at home anyway, and they don't mingle much with the locals. Instead, encourage them (even with limited funding?), to teach their younger siblings about the culture from where they came. They can talk the language, they have plenty of free time to tell stories, they will feel part of their own community and it will give the first and second generation of youngsters a sense of belonging to somewhere. Subsequent generations can be slowly integrated into being Finns.

[umit]

@ network_engineer

Since I felt some sarcasm and humiliation in your final post, I will be also sarcastic or maybe rather rude in my last post for this thread...

Equity: Yes, it seems I used a wrong term... It would be EQUALITY, instead. Maybe you can confirm with your perfect command of English...

Anyway, my mistake doesn't make any difference on your side. Because, as you already described by referring to dictionaries, what you want is not EQUITY, but EQUALITY. See:

1. The statement: Live and let live. Maybe this statement is being misunderstood. In its entirety, it means one has the right to enjoy the same rights as everybody, have the same duties as others towards society. NOT MORE! And certainly not based on some whim.

With your profound knowledge into English language, there can't be a mistake in the expression!

Let me correct my formula: EQUALITY ≠ EQUITY

Logical fallacies: Maybe they taught you a good English, but obviously neglected teaching a good reasoning (I will try to explain my analysis on that later).

You have been saying that immigrants coming from "steadfast-ideals" countries, demanding some fantastic rights, which they cannot even dream of in their respective countries. This statement is irrelevant to the issue we have been discussing. You cannot limit one immigrant's rights to the rights he/she has in his/her original country. Didn't they teach you that the human rights are universal??? And also reciprocity (I hope I'm using the correct word) doesn't apply to human rights. It's really funny when you imagine the situation:

Immigrant (I): According to my beliefs I can't swim in mixed pools. That's why I want you to allocate separate swimming times for men and women.
Pool Authority (PA): Where are you from?
I: Saudi Arabia...
PA: Himmm... I don't think Saudi authorities would allow my mixed swimming request. Denied! Piss off!

Another Immigrant (AI): According to my beliefs I can't swim in mixed pools. That's why I want you to allocate separate swimming times for men and women.
Pool Authority (PA): Where are you from?
AI: Turkey...
PA: Really... I was in Antalya last year, and it was possible to swim in mixed pools and beaches. Granted! What time is good for you?

Tax Payers Money: As you and some other posters are repeatedly bringing the issue to tax payers money, I will repeat myself and try to be more clear... Firstly, the immigrants are also paying tax (at least most of them). Secondly, they are not building a new swimming pool, but they are arranging the times (no extra money is spent). Lastly, to make you understand better I will ask a reverse question. Why should someone pay tax for a swimming pool, where he will never soak himself in???

Evolution: No offense taken, but I didn't see the point why you found it so funny. Maybe my poor English is not enough to understand the wit in that... Ahh! I think it's again a misunderstanding due to my poor English! I meant the norms evolving, not mankind. If mankind is evolving or not is another issue

Now let's come to the most interesting part, my psychoanalysis about you

During the colonial times the Britain studied the problems of colonization very well. They decided to assimilate the people where they colonize. So, the success of the conquest would be assured by the cooperation of the natives... Changing the education system is one of the most important steps of this process. They taught their own language to local kids very well, but they also taught them to be loyal to their masters. Speaking and behaving like the masters make the kids feel themselves important. They see others, who do not do very well in the "integration", as miserable creatures. Their unacceptable demands contradicting the lifestyles of their masters were simply insults to them. The process was so successful that, soon this assimilation was recorded into their genes (See: Evolution ) Even after many generations this evolved genetic code forces them to "integrate" themselves to the societies, which they see superior. This explains why they find excuses and draw themselves back when it comes to integrating inferior societies (See: Circumcision ) Another characteristic of the people bearing this genetic code is behaving more king than the king himself. They can become ballistic if you defend something which might upset their masters... You can see them in the first line of the row, fighting for the values of their masters. (See: This thread)

BTW I have strong suspicion that you are the same person with Raamv, he had the same problems...

A final note:

But I'll stop my points with this last post.

Encarta dictionary defines stop as "discontinue something" or "to come to an end, or bring something to an end", last as "finally: as the final point"

What I understand from your sentence, with my poor English is, you were finished with this thread, and I didn't expect any other comment from you. It seems they didn't teach you well the meanings of these two words, where you learned your English

Lastly, (Ooops, I already mentioned "A final note" above... Anyway, my English is not perfect, that's why who cares) again a reverse remark to the "if you don't like leave" statement: Nobody is forcing Finland to accept immigrants. Don't take them in and kick the ones already entered out, leave (edit: live ) in your peaceful country happily...

THE END

[Upphew]

Nobody is forcing Finland to accept immigrants. Don't take them in and kick the ones already entered out, leave in your peaceful country happily...

Tell that to Astrid Thors.

[onkko]

The children are taught in school (ie no incremental expense for the classrooms) and the teachers are usually immigrants themselves (which boosts employment amongst immigrants).

So workers who arent needed without program somehow doesnt cost anything or are cheap? "Multicultural" schooling costs about 25% more than normal and all those immigrant language teachers who arent hired because of need like english teachers are are in fact burden to society.
How much demand you see on urdu or such languages? And how in hell someone hired by goverment making goverment invented work is somehow cheap and how that helps at all on main problem what is tax money (hint, teacher is using not creating money).

Hint: Teachers are a medium to long term investment. So of course they cost in the short term, but this is by far outweighed later on by the benefits.
If you save in children education, it will cost you much more in the long term as it is easier and cheaper to teach kids something then adults.

No !"#¤% sherlock, now just show me where income from knowing urdu comes and why we should pay it. I understand studying lingua franca what is english or because of geograph russian/sweden/germany but some unneeded langue just because there is few speakers...
Hint: you dont call something what cant bring income as investment, you call it waste of money.

[Upphew]

Hint: Teachers are a medium to long term investment. So of course they cost in the short term, but this is by far outweighed later on by the benefits.
If you save in children education, it will cost you much more in the long term as it is easier and cheaper to teach kids something then adults.

No !"#¤% sherlock, now just show me where income from knowing urdu comes and why we should pay it. I understand studying lingua franca what is english or because of geograph russian/sweden/germany but some unneeded langue just because there is few speakers...
Hint: you dont call something what cant bring income as investment, you call it waste of money.

I wouldn't go so far that saying learning urdu is a waste of money. Teaching it from first (or 3rd or 7th grade)... I can agree that it could be a waste of money, but in university (when one or two teachers are enough and it would be sensible to send few people abroad to learn), why not?

[easily-lost]

Let's take this into perspective: Let's include also China, Africa. In China, each province has a certain dialect that affects, although not radical. Africa, each country has its language and then again dialects that are not even compatible in grammar (or so I am told). Expect the state to pay for it ALL?

It's impossible to have all languages in the world taught and supported by any government, I'm afraid, but as the original article stated:

Equality may require special treatment for groups that are in a socially or economically weaker position, the ombudsman's statement added.

Since you mentioned China... There are 55 minorities, who are taught in both Mandarin (the official language) and their own languages, mainly funded by the government, because of the same reason as the quote above from the article-- "weaker position".

However, it would help clear things up by giving the reasons of how Muslim women are in a "weaker position" compared to other women under such circumstance.

[Bubba Elvis XIV]

The sad thing about this case is that those women probably don't give flying f@ck about it...or at least not all of them...However, pressure from their own community or partners probably stops them swimming at the regular times. And in some comunities going against the demands of their community can lead to tragedy. So if they wish to swim or more importantly need to learn to swim, the only option they have might be to demand seperate hours.

(that could be how they are in a weaker positon - they don't have the same equality in their community / marriage / relationships as other women).