Racism veiled as liberation

[earwicga]

IMO, this is a brilliant article today by Madeline Bunting - an excerpt:

"The veil debate is making it entirely legitimate to pillory, mock and ridicule a tiny number of women on the basis of what they wear. French politicians described the full veil as a "walking coffin"; on comment threads online there is contempt and sneers for the full veil and those who wear it ? "hiding under a blanket", "going round with a paper bag over your head". In France it is estimated there are only 2,000 women who cover their faces with the burqa or the niqab out of a Muslim population of five million. The response is out of all proportion.

Let's be clear: the niqab and burqa are extreme interpretations of the Islamic requirement for modest dress; few Islamic scholars advocate their use, and many ? including Tariq Ramadan ? have urged women not to use them. They are as alien to many Muslim cultures as they are to the west. And yes, there are instances of patriarchy where some women might be encouraged or even forced to wear a full veil by their husbands or fathers. But generalisations don't fit. Increasingly, young women are choosing to wear the full veil, seeing it as a powerful statement of identity.

Invoking the full weight of the state to police dress codes in public is an extraordinary extension of state powers over an aspect of citizen behaviour which is largely regarded as your own business. Provided you are wearing some clothing, western public space is a free-for-all, and across every capital in Europe that is strikingly self-evident"
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/jul/14/forced-into-freedom-france

One example of a young French woman's reaction to this can be found here: bit.ly/aBVa4x

What do MumsNetters think? Seems to me that if we condemn those who dictate as to women's clothing in Sudan for example (see Lubna Hussein) then we must equally condemn those who dictate as to women's clothing in Europe.

It's a strange old debate.

I detest the burkha.

I also think the ban is ridiculous and unworkable.

I agree that this whole 'debate' seems to give people (usually men) license to be offensive, derogatory and bigoted and say the most outrageous things while hiding behind their declared liberal values.

I am amazed at some of the stuff that comes out of the mouths of my most liberal, educated and thoughtful friends mouths when it comes to Islam, actually.

We don't tend to ban things in England but I do think the burkha is ridiculous and any woman who chooses to cover up like that neesd to be told teh damage she is in effect to other women.

In other words I like that we have total freedom of speech to tell them they are very wrong to wear it and probably even offend against God in doing so but I would not ban it. We are not afterall like the French.

I detest the niqab/burkha too, but don't understand your comment Xenia as to how women who wear it damage (in effect) other women?

And what are the French like? Do you mean the total seperation of state and religion?

I agree it will be difficult to police the ban. However I would have it banned in an instant. Racial tolerance works both ways, covering heads I have no objection to, however covering of the face I am completely against. Veil and indentity in my opinion do not go in the same statement.

Every woman who becomes a housewife damages other women. We are all a huge example to others. We do not exist in some kind of nice isolated personal space. We are part of almost a living organism which is our society and group and the more women who cover up the harder it is for others not to.

However I believe more in freedom than not and we must never get like the Arab states which legislate on dress for all religions or we become as bad as they are.

The French? They are weird on all sorts of topics and we don't take our lead from them.
Ancient aristocratic eccentric British women and indeed Michael jackson's children and others sometimes choose to cover their faces. It's fine if people want to do that. We don't tend to ban things in the UK. It's not in our national culture to do so. We are in favour of difference and eccentricity but also we are lucky to live in a society where we are free to say - gosh what an idiot why are you wearing clothes cira 1600 which you cannot run in properly.

Xenia i disagree with you EVERY woman is entitled to doing whatever she feel suits her life if that means being a house wife and she is happy with that so be it. What damages women is when people say women must do this or must not do that because....i say so.

Xenia - Do you mean women who become housewives because their earning potential is equal to, or below the earning potential of childcare workers? Because somebody has to mind the kids, after all.

Sammyuni
yep-i agree with you!
ill also add that-if a woman choses to wear a burkha-thats fine by me-id respect her choice!

Sammyuni
yep-i agree with you!
ill also add that-if a woman choses to wear a burkha-thats fine by me-id respect her choice!

sorry-this has accidently come up twice!

oh FGS don't ask Xenia to expound on her silly, offensive theories about how all women should live the way she does.

Incredible how so early on in the thread, she has managed to get people to talk about housewives instead of the burkha.

I agree with her on one thing: we are not like the French.

I think it's a really slippery slope, banning the burka. Once restrictions are put on practicing one's religion, whatever it may be, then you are restricting their freedom of religion (and yes, I realize that some argue that the burka is not mentioned in the Koran).

It's interesting though that it's mainly women who are the subject of restrictions. We don't see banning of the robes Islamic men wear, or the head dress of Sikhs. Wonder why?

"It's interesting though that it's mainly women who are the subject of restrictions. We don't see banning of the robes Islamic men wear, or the head dress of Sikhs. Wonder why?"

Because they do not cover the face

Fair point, sammy but no need for the .

Any way my opinion is that this should only occur in places or situations where it is important to see the face, so that could mean airports or when ID is important.

Nothing against freedom of expression as long as it does not impede national security or police duties and various things along those lines.

Sorry Ilove

I wouldn't ban the burkah outright But just as motorcyclists have to remove helmets in banks, post offices etc, then so should burkah wearers. And always at airports. No matter how many men are present. And I would not want my kids taught by a burkah wearing female.

Don't think that going round fully covered can possibly help with integration or communication though.

I don't think it should be banned but I do think it's anti social.

Anything long (and tight skirt and high heels) makes it hard to get about, cycle, run etc and people should be free to explain that and our hisotry - how Victorian women fought long and hard to get into trousers and out of hobble skirts, corset etc.

I wouldn't ban it though. Perhaps we could say in the U Muslim men must cover up and women not though - just reverse the sexes on that point for 2000 years and see how the men feel about it and don't let muslim men out of the house unless accompanied by a female relative.

I agree with Xenia that we don't live in an isolated bubble, we are all part of a community and we all have the potential to affect it.

I think she is right to say that burkha wearers affect other women - by making it more common so that other women feel obliged to wear it. More than just this, however, is the thought that it may gradually affect society's perception of women, about what women's place is, what we should be doing, etc, and how women are viewed by men.

And I also agree about the tight skirt and high heels. Bad for the feet, bad for the spine, very uncomfortable, I don't understand why people wear high heels. But I wouldn't ban them. Just as with the burkha, instead I think education is the way forward - get people to think about why they are wearing them, why they feel obliged to, and the impact it is having on other people as it becomes the expected norm.

'I don't think it should be banned but I do think it's anti social.'

In what way is the burqa/niqab antisocial? I don't get that a woman who choses not to show her face is considered to be anti-social.

'I think she is right to say that burkha wearers affect other women - by making it more common so that other women feel obliged to wear it.'

But the vast majority of Muslim women in France don't choose to wear the veil. How do you account for this? The vast majority of women in this country wear make-up. It doesn't make me feel obliged to wear it.

I think not showing your face is anti social in our society, in exactly the same way as wearing sunglasses permanently or a hoodie is.

It is contrary to how people have related to each other in the west. Hence folk tales about dodgy characters always featuring hoods, concealing faces etc. There's something which we find slightly suspicious about concealing your face. It's associated with secrecy, criminality and being up to no good and has been for centuries. That's why people go slightly bonkers about it, I think, even when they rationally know there's nothing essentially wrong with a woman wearing a niqab or a teenager wearing a hoodie, it taps into a cultural discomfort about it.

The French law is a bit odd. So much for Voltaire and the traditions of the enlightenment.

I don't think what women should be told what to wear.

We can dislike something and think it is a poor choice, but part of women having liberty is being allowed to make poor choices without some institution stepping in and telling us what to do as if we are children.

The veil argument is just a variation on the constant theme of trying to control women and what they do with their bodies.