French citizenship : Only if your wife isn't veiled

[nothingofthesort]

I can't figure out what to make of this. Men shouldn't get a say in how their wives dress isn't it? Doesn't this encourage the opposite?

But they are- unwittingly perhaps- reinforcing the message that the woman is incapable of making a decision for herself, and only the state can decide her dress.

Would a law directly affecting oppressive men rather than targeting them through their wives not send a clearer message- even if the outcome of many citizenship applications is the same (as a niqab ban) as a result?

I believe it is wrong for a husband to tell his wife what to wear- I'm not sure how the state simply stepping into his oppressive role is any better to be honest.

Not sure either... They are trying to protect someone they consider in a vunerable position. Obviously, this can be very offensive for those who do not feel they are fitting the category 'vulnerable'

And all these measures can end on even more oppression... hiding more, lying more. The most interesting thing will be to know how on earth are they going to implement the law.

Is this another excuse to CCTV (and similar) muslim families?

so sikh men can wear turbans, because they want to but muslim women cant wear veils as they are being forced

I know of some sikh men who only do things like wear to the gudwara/wear a turban because their wives insist, they sneak of to the pub and drink alcohol without ever telling their wives. I wouldnt be so arrogant as to then assume that all sikh men wearing turbans were like that.

It doesnt matter how much i say it to anybody, as a muslim women (who wears hijab and is happy to put up with any disadvantages that may bring) i dont know any women forced to cover by their husbands. i know alot of muslim women, i talk to lots.

If we are actually trying to help oppressed muslim women we should be sayiog to them, "if your husband is forcing you to do things against your will, its abuse, we will support you" things like specialist refuges (there is one near me for asian women for example so it doesnt seem so scary for oppressed women and carries less stigma) would help, going into schools and talking about forced marriage, how it can be rape married or not if you say no and it happens anyway would help. Trying to ban niqaab wearing in this roundabout way says to oppressed women, "Your husband can oppress you, he can stop you ever leaving the house, we dont care, but if you do leave the house we dont want to see you in that get up because its ugly to us, so just go be oppressed out of sight"

littleducks,
I agree with you. This is why I used the example of Jewish women and wigs. It does not show in public. So nobody cares if this is their own decision or whatever the symbols underpining it.

Anyway, we cannot ignore this is not about the hijab, but about the full veil or burka. And here I think there are many other implications, many cultural, about making yourself visible. And it seems very much contrary to French and Western culture. We should probably be able to accept this to start with. It may not be rational or reasonable, but it is still very much a cultural thing that for many people symbolises oppression. Muslim countries like Iran would not feel the need to enter this debate. You must cover your head. But they do not pretend to be neutral or to embrace individual choices all the time. The issue is that under the flag of equality and individualism, French (or others) cannot accept they are imposing something to others, just because they feel is against their -no-neutral- culture.

mamaloco Mon 14-Dec-09 09:12:49
"I think most of you didn't understand the news very well. Most women wearing the full viel are told to do so by their husband or their fathers, brothers. They have no say in it at all."

And by this little piece of legislation the French government are saying "we're fine with that". "Husbands telling their wives what to wear- this is how we expect things to be in France. A husband who is unable to impose his will on his wife in the manner we tell him to will not get citizenship from us."

"it's their democracy"

not much of a democracy though , is it, when the government can dictate what people wear. In fact, it is the opposite of democracy.

The way the French have gone about it is very dehumanising and degrading - it is extremely insulting. If they were truly interested in the plight of oppressed women there are far better ways of going about it.

Many French Muslims are Algerian Kabyles. Kabyle traditional dress includes a white scarf that covers the lower part of the face. This has absolutely nothing to do with Islam, it's a Kabyle tradition that some women do, and others dont. (Many Kabyle women choose not to cover their heads at all, to put it into context).

Presumably the husbands of women who choose to wear this item of traditional dress, won't get citizenship either?

Europe's current ridiculous moves towards secular "equality" (= you must think like me or I'll ban you) are very bad. We need tolerance, not phoney equality, achieved by banning people we don't agree with.

"Trying to ban niqaab wearing in this roundabout way says to oppressed women, "Your husband can oppress you, he can stop you ever leaving the house, we don't care, but if you do leave the house we don't want to see you in that get up because its ugly to us, so just go be oppressed out of sight"

Brilliant point Littleducks. This ban seems to be more about aesthetics then women's welfare.

Oh, and I've also wondered why no one ever gets upset about Sikh men's turbans.

I interpret the article as just a further example of prejudice against Muslims in France, having lived in France for many years in the past.

An important thing to remember is the high status of catholicism in France. So state schools may be entirely secular but the social elite often send their children to private catholic schools where they are free to practice their faith and to wear a crucifix, something I believe is not tolerated in anormal state school. Jewish people also may attend their own faith schools and wear traditional Jewish clothing.

Muslims always appear to be singled out as they are on the whole part of a disadvantaged underclass in French society and an easy and popular target. Either all outward signs of religious identity should be outlawed or none.

Do the Muslim children attend private Muslim schools or do they mainly go to state schools? There is a difference between state and private schools in France, and other countries too(thinking here of the US where state schools are extremely secular and the principle of separation if church and state is quite rigidly enforced -- hence the occasional hullabaloo over teaching evolution vs. creationism in areas where fundamentalist Christian ideas hold sway). The state does not sponsor any religion in both cases, and schools that are run and paid for by the state must comply with this religion avoidance.

France does not take exception to the burqa or niqab for aesthetic reasons, but because they are symbols of separation from society, religious ones at that, with the added dimension that France considers them a symbol of male domination (based on religious beliefs) of women.

Sikh men are not making themselves invisible.

I´ve never heard of any Muslim schools and doubt they would exist as the resources are probably not there. I suspect well-to-do muslims would send their kids to a good catholic school!

Yep, I'm thinking very little to do with equality - alot to do with one particular religion that is not liked. That's it.

As I woman I do not find the female face covered offensive as long as the female doing it chooses to do it.

I do find our young and not so young women getting bigger tits, shoving their faces with poison so you cannot see their wrinkles, not eating and being orange far far sadder for women's equality.

Well Riven - I'm the 'wrong' side of 40 now and just got bit big and flabby - hey that's OK - no wrinkles yet and when they come - hey that's OK - BUT I'D NEVER EVER CHOOSE TO BE ORANGE.

Why the hell can't people where what the bloody hell they want. I'm not a fan of any particular religion but a piece of cloth worn over the face if the WOMAN chooses so - why on earth not.

And if there was a sudden movement against Sikhs' turbans, how likely is it that a government would make a wife's citizenship depend on whether her husband wore it?

It's not just the French that seek to control religious head-dress.

Neither extreme is right, neither the full face covered, nor the everything out on show. A proper, sensible compromise needs to be reached. Neither lifestyle is desirable in a modern, free and equal society.

The full face covering is largely a Saudi tribal dress, being adopted as a sign of adherance to faith.

Men in Egypt sporting a full islamic beard are also often prevented from entering certain places. Egypt itself is trying to keep a lid on the more devout of it's subjects.

IMHO, despite the dramatic increase, over the last 10 years, in places such as Egypt for the women to take up the veil, actual behaviour leaves an awful lot to be desired. In many instances, as far as I have seen, it's mostly for appearances.

LOL, Riven, it's not just the men that go round knocking on the doors though... I came back home to the UK, leaving DH to pack up etc.

20 women, all married, all wives of his supposed friends came a-calling at our door, begging him for sex. All of this during the day, in Ramadan...

He also had 2 student stalkers waiting hours for him next to his car, or in the lobby of our building openly offering him their virginity...

Luckily for them I wasn't there to beat them senseless. Though that was the way he finally got rid of them, to tell them I was upstairs and he was going to call me to come down and have a word or 2...

I'm shocked to know that you have been harrassed in the UK for wearing a veil. At least though, you are able to give them a piece of your mind if you feel so inclined though, in a language they would understand too! You could also call the Police and they would do something about it.

In Egypt, women don't really have either option. This happened for 2 years running

I'm thankfully not in the 97% of foreign women in Egypt that were sexually harrassed, but being constantly observed, followed and photographed has left me with mild agoraphobia, which 6m on, is gradually diminishing.

Interesting point about the face recognition thing. I don't think that would really be a driving political motive for wishing to limit the covering of faces. If a woman is merely veiled, her face is still visible, and therefore recognisable.

I think that the full face covering is somehow intimidating to many of us in the west.

I honestly think that the desire to limit the amount of covering is purely because it is NOT native to out culture, and our NVC requires much more facial interaction.

Veiling, with respect, is IMHO imposing control on a woman somehow, to cover her hair, the back of her neck, her skin. But it's become an accepted part of a religion, and is re-inforced to bolster the religion.

In the UK, where we women DO have more equal rights, it's less of an issue, and more of an option. Riven, you for example, made your own considered choice to take up the veil.

When you look at the life of a muslim woman in a predominantly muslim country, she has no where near equal rights. The veil is just another expectation of her. She may even think it's her choice of when to wear it.

When my DH last lived there 20 years ago, hardly any women covered. Now everyone does.

LOL, you had pink hair? I always wanted red hair, but am too old now

But I bet technically you could still...

Thank you groundhog for your perspective. You reiterated (in a much more civil way) what I've been trying to say pages ago.