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.

earwica: 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.

For reasons HerBeatitude said! It is covering yourself up, how is it not antisocial?

the wearing of the niqab seems to be very popular now with young muslims. i wonder if it is like a youth subculture amongst themselves so they identify with their own youth group. it's interesting that in more liberal middle eastern countries like syria, the niqab is frowned on by older women.
stricter islamic dress in this country also seems more prevalent amongst muslims in poorer areas, and from poorer backgrounds. those whose families are more educated or affluent seem much more liberal.
personally, i think that if it's a personal choice by the woman to wear a scarf, fair enough. although i admit to feeling uneasy when i see a woman in a full veil which is not a requirement of her religion.

MillyR I think that's true as well. But it's not just about telling women what to do. It's also about a very deep paranoia about the threat to French culture that the veil is so visible a symbol of.

It's like Xenia said, we're not like the French. That's why there's no English equivalent of the Academie Francaise, trying to protect our language. We'll take words from anywhere, we're confident that English can cope as a language and if we're not, we don't care that much anyway.

There was some interesting Muslim bloke on the radio the other day talking about the fact that when he sees young girls in headscarves and face veils, quite often they aren't remotely modestly dressed according to muslim standards - they're wearing quite skimpy dresses, quite revealing jeans/ trousers, rather than loose clothing and the only thing islamic there is the veil - so it does look like this is a political/ cultural statement, rather than only a religious one, for some sections of young muslim women.

Which of course, is driven by the hostility to it in the media and politics.

Aye, that's the way I see it MillyR.

msrisotto, well, then that's our problem then isn't it. It doesn't mean that wearing the burqa/niqab is antisocial. I don't feel threatened by youngsters wearing hoodies, but I recognise that it is something that we are supposed to feel because the media etc. says they are threatening. I don't think HerBeatitude didn't did say it is antisocial to cover up. If we believed that then we could also believe fundamentalists such as Islamists, Christianists etc. that say it is antisocial to show skin.

earwicga, a lot of people do feel threatened by people wearing hoodies (proof = they're banned in shopping centres), people feel threatened by people wearing balaclavas....I don't think it's because we're supposed to feel this way, it is because these 2 items of clothing are related to theft and often violence. These are the only other items of clothing which cover up the face therefore people are wary of people covering their faces. This is our culture.

By the way, you say you don't think HerBeatitude said it was anti social to cover up, here's a quote of her post "I think not showing your face is anti social in our society"

Women or indeed anyone should be allowed to wear what they like (within reason) but i agree that they should have to remove the face covering part in shops, airprts ect as it can been seen as a terrorist threat, like motorcycle helmets ect, if one of these women did commit a crime then for the police to beable to track them down it makes sense to beable to see thier faces.

I see it as an extension of colonialism - French have a history of telling Muslim people how to live. About ten years ago I worked for a media organisation monitoring international radio broadcasts and there was a story about the French govt trying to "influence" radio broadcasts in Algeria.

milly
[i dont think that women should be told what to wear]

well said!
i writ a post saying something like this last night but decided not to send it as i didnt want to be shouted down!
yes-i agree with you tottally!

i dont think they have to remove them in shops!
this is like saying that all women who wear
them are potential terrorists!!
anyone could be a terrorist!

'anyone could be a terrorist!'

Indeed, and it is most likely in the UK to be a white male. But these cases are not usually given the OMG It's A Terorist treatment by the media.

saadia - that's interesting. As you will know, there is a wealth of information linking colonialism and the veil. I think Adam Curtis has done some work on this.

TitsalinaBumSquash - a baseball cap stops a CCTV camera from seeing a face. Should we ban these?

Ok, but people, men or women, do not get beaten for wearing hoodies, or baseball caps or sunglasses. It's all very well to say that no one should tell women what to wear: does that mean we should ban Gok and Trinnie and Susanna by the way? But it's also worth remembering that many women who wear the burqa/niqab do so because they ARE being told what to wear - by MEN. I am NOT saying that this is universal and it seems that French women are deciding to cover up for themselves but it's important to keep the broader context of compulsion in mind when discussing 'freedom of choice'.

I meant, men and women don't get beaten for NOT wearing etc...

I don't think it is labelled incorrectly Riven. My understanding is that the garments labelled burqa in relation to Afghanistan or Pakistan is actually a chadri. Burqa means outside clothing covering one's under clothing, with the niquab being the actual part which covers the face.

ROFL at offensively smiling people.

Maybe they should make a law that people in Kent should have to wear burqas, to stop them smiling at each other in case it causes an affray.

Riven. I LOL at that.

I mean, the rosy image of smiling people.

Riven
[...smiling at people and saying hello....]

ha ha ha ha -where is this street?
ha-often when im out and about and cheerfully trying to talk to others-im met with suspicion!!

and dont he realise that we live in a multi cultual country!

Most muslims don't cover up. Indeed an article I read today by a muslim was saying this was really the clothing pre Islam which it is. It is what women wore before the Prophet was around. Anyway they can dress in totally impreactical ways that make them look totally stupid if they want and people int UK (but sadly not many muslim countries - hence keeness of them to come to our better freer country) are free to say their clothing is silly. The freedom of speech is the good thing here.

And I see today the Government has said of course it won't ban it. We're English. We don't do that sort of thing. It's why we're one of the best countries on earth.

I feel a bit uneasy about the niqab (face veil), because I do think my default setting is 'Women don't really choose to wear it; it is chosen for them by the men [husbands/fathers/brothers] in their lives.'

However, I did hear a discussion about this issue this morning on R4. It's about halfway in to the programme. And I also read an article in yesterday's 'Times' ('A niqab is a symbol of misogyny. It shouldn?t be banned', by Houriya Ahmed), which I can't link to as the Times now charges for online access. Both items gave me pause for thought - maybe women do choose the niqab after all?

Yet, yet, yet ... Yes, I do wonder if the niqab is an imposition rather than something that is freely chosen.

I wore a niqab a few times a while back.
I didn't like the way it restricted my peripheral vision.
Seems a good way of avoiding burning the skin and overheating in a hot country. I wonder if that is how it originally developed.

My understanding is that this sort of covering is only worn outside the home?
Perhaps the way in Britain we have such isolated homelives, in nuclear families, with most of life focused on work, school, shopping that we can't imagine a life where extended families congregate in the home?

I was wondering the other day if this country in general were more tolerant of muslim and other cultural differences including clothing, if young muslim women would be less inclined to go to the extreme of wearing a niqab?