Between 30 and 40 American Muslims fought with security officials at Playland Amusement Park in Rye, New York Tuesday afternoon in an incident that eventually escalated to include dozens of police officers from Rye and neighboring towns, a police helicopter, two injuries to park rangers, and fifteen Muslims arrested — two charged with felony assault, most of the rest charged with disorderly conduct.
It began with a group outing organized by the Muslim American Society of New York, to celebrate Eid-ul-Fitr (the Muslim holiday celebrating the end of Ramadan). The group organizers had been informed ahead of time (“painstakingly,” park officials add) about long-standing and safety regulations prohibiting the wearing of headgear on some rides, and visitors were told again when they entered the park; but a group of women and girls wearing hijabs went to the security office to complain about the policy, refused to leave, pushing ensued, handcuffs came out, Muslim men intervened and, as one visitor later said, “the situation went downhill from there.”
(There were reports of an incident earlier on the day, which began when a woman struck a ride operator who would not allow her on a ride, followed by police trying to restrain her, her husband intervening and, to a lesser degree than the later melee, the situation went downhill from there)
The question really is, in a multi-cultural society, how should — or how can — an amusement park handle this sort of thing?
I answered No to the poll question as phrased. But I would want to add, religious and similar dress codes may be a good reason to prompt a review of safety rules. A lot of such rules are somebody’s WTF jottings without strong empirical basis. Or based in some actual experience but codified more broadly than need be. If somebody once got choked by a neck fastener when the top of their hat got caught on something, ban neck fasteners but not all headgear … f’rinstance.
I answered “no”, but with this caveat: the regulations against headgear must be reasonable. I wear a hat almost all the time, and I have never been told to remove it for safety reasons at an amusement park ride (I have been advised many times to remove it because it is likely to come off my head and get lost). Why does this park have so many rides where headgear is not allowed?
Much of the female Muslim headgear is loose fitting. In my days in the US Postal Service – a plant operation, not delivery, it was not uncommon for Muslims to be hired as part of the Christmas busy season. They were not allowed around any of the mechanical sorting machines for obvious reasons.
I also answered “no,” but with the caveat that there must be a bona fide reason for the prohibition. This is always an acceptable reason for other forms of discrimination, but is a strict standard.
I answered “No” also. The rules apply to everyone no matter their religion. If my religion required me to carry a firearm I would expect to have to abide by airport security regulations and make a choice to put my religious beliefs aside to fly, or not fly. In this case remove the headgear to go on certain ride, or not to go on those rides.
If the rule was “no muslim headgear on these rides, other headgear like Shad’s hat is okay” then I’d have a problem with that.
That said I can’t fathom a reason why headgear isn’t allowed in their house of mirrors.
re: Mitch
WTH is a “neck fastener”? Like the bolts that keeps Frankenstein’s monster’s head attached? What does that have to do with head-gear?
From the article, it looks like they were looking to create a problem. They were repeatedly told ahead of time they would not be allowed and yet the came in and insisted that exceptions should be made for them. I smell a set up.
I don’t think that’s an accurate description of what happened. The organizers from Muslim Americans from NY were apparently told, but they had a group of over 3000. It seems reasonable to me that they didn’t all get the memo.
Loading and unloading amusement park rides is a challenging job, because management wants people loaded and unloaded as quickly as possible to keep the line moving, but they also have to have to maintain safety (which largely means protecting bozos from themselves).
So, the ride operators tell a bunch of Muslim women that they can’t ride the ride (because they have headgear) but probably didn’t stop the explain the safety policy. From the other side of things, they see that several Muslims are being told they can’t ride. I can see them complaining about that, especially if they’ve been waiting in line for any length of time. If there was just one of them, you can pull her aside, explain the rule, and she’ll either accept it and go do something else, or go to the park’s offices to complain. If you have a group of them, they get braver and complain right where they are. The park police didn’t want them making their complaints there, disrupting the line, and tried to move them someplace else, and they didn’t want to move.
That’s my guess, based on other news coverage, my understanding of how amusement parks work, and my understanding of how human beings function in groups.
Mostly, I think that if it had been organized, way more than 15 of the 3000 Muslims would have been involved enough to be arrested/detained. A sit-down protest with 3 or 400 people would have been way more effective, both in terms of obstructing the park’s operation and in positive PR. Plus they would have been ready with press releases.
The key question for me is, are there signs that explain this policy where people queue up to go on the rides that restrict headgear? (The fact that the policy is on their website, and that organizers of the event were warned, does not mean that the individuals actually at the center of this incident knew that such a policy existed.
I think, if the signage is present and clear, that would be the end of it. Even if they DON’T have anything like a reasonable reason for the rule, if it’s well-posted, then waiting in line and confronting the ride operators is not the way to object.
On the other hand, if the rule is not well-posted, then having someone wait in line however long and then get picked out of line when they get to the front, might be reasonably interpreted as being singled out for mistreatment without reason, even if there IS a good reason for the rule.
What Lola said. From what I read they were offered full refunds. Sounds like they were looking for trouble unless there is more to the story.
Like most of the other people here, I don’t think that safety regulations should be set aside for religious reasons, but I do think that they should be thought about, and that accommodations should be available. It’s a safety hazard to have lose headgear; that makes sense. Many Muslim women don’t like exposing their hair in public; that ALSO makes sense.
Only some rides at Rye Playland permit headgear. Okay, that’s fair — but what does “headgear” MEAN? Could I wear a kippah if I wanted to? What about a do-rag or other kerchief? Or a snood? Or a hairnet?
I’m certain that there MUST be forms of headgear that can satisfy the safety needs of Rye Playland, and also the modesty needs of most Muslim women.
I smell a communications breakdown somewhere. If the organizers of the outing were told of the policy, then SOMEONE ought to have started trying to figure out an appropriate accommodation at THAT point.
Honestly, I suspect a whole bunch of communications failures, along with people not responding as respectfully as they might, escalating a situation that SHOULD have been fairly simple to deal with into a major mess.
I suspect undercurrents of either anti-Muslim sentiment, or of people assuming undercurrents of anti-Muslim sentiment that wasn’t there, or both.
I’m imagining a situation in which, on the way in, some random yokel yelled derogatory things about Muslims, which put the guys on edge. And, once someone’s in that state, I can imagine someone misinterpreting a genuine concern about safety as an anti-Muslim sentiment. And THEN, once someone’s getting all upset about that, I can imagine a person getting all annoyed that these Muslims are demanding to be allowed to do stuff that’s unsafe, and who do they think they are and why do they have to wear that anyway . . .
. . . and at THAT point, everyone’s well down a road that ends up with dozens of police, a police helicopter, two injuries, and fifteen arrests.
(Naturally, I’m NOT saying that “both parties are at fault.” I don’t KNOW the details, and, even if my little story up there is substantially true, it’s almost never that both parties are EQUALLY at fault. I’m just saying that that’s the sort of SHAPE of an incident that COULD result in this sort of thing.)
Communication breakdown for sure. The fact that some rides do not allow any headgear is apparently on the website, and the organizers for the Muslim Americans for NY were warned… but they had 3000 people in their group, so I don’t think you can say that “they were warned”. Some of them were warned that this might be an issue, which rather suggests that, in the three years they’ve had this policy, some Muslims have complained about the policy.
And no, they’re not imagining a fairly open hostile attitude towards Muslims among some Americans… some from an inability to tell the difference between Muslims who want to kill Americans from Muslims who ARE Americans, some from religious intolerance, and some basic anti-immigrants-in-general.
I don’t think this started out as an anti-Muslim thing. I think it started out as a bunch of guys around a conference table thinking “it’s easier to just ban all headgear than have the ride operators try to decide which ones are safe and which ones aren’t as people are getting on.”
It’s a shame that these Muslim women have to decide between covering their heads and going on the really cool rides at the amusement park. I bet they don’t have much fun at the waterpark, either.
Here’s what I’d like to see. At a Little People of America convention, a large group goes to an amusement park and defies the “You must be this tall” signs.
You probably won’t see that; they had the case not long ago of the war vet with no legs who went on the rollercoaster, was thrown clear, and died of this injuries.
My earliest memories of Disneyland is of signs that said “you must be at least this tall (picture my hand two inches over my head) to go on this cool ride.”
But, you’ll notice that they position those signs where people start to line up for the ride. Because the only thing worse than being told you can’t go on the ride is being told you can’t go on the ride after you’ve waited in line for it.
*Safety* rules are for safety. If you insist on defying them, then you have to be prepared to pay the price. Unfortunately, your preparation won’t prevent your heirs and assigns, or even those just interested, in suing the park operators when you die.
“Neck Fasteners” include buttons, drawstrings and other methods of closing headgear at the neck. (A child at my kids’ elementary school died when the drawstring of her hood got caught in an enclosed slide. Of course, no one had a pocket knife at hand at the time. The child’s parents started a nationwide campaign to eliminate drawstrings on hoods.)
If it was an elementary school, pocket knives had probably been banned a long time ago.
I don’t have a problem with exceptions being made, as long as the person accepts the responsibility for his/her unsafe behavior and waives his/her right to sue the park for damages or injury resulting from said exception.
But the safety in this instance is not just for the hat wearer, it’s for everybody on the ride should the hat fall on the tracks and make the ride jam, derail or something along those lines.
Do they check the middle aged men to see if they are wearing toupees?
The “Religion of Peace” strikes again.