I was shocked to find this headline in the news today; the man threatening to burn the Quran was still fresh in my mind.
Today, the French Senate passed a ban on full Muslim veils 246 to 1. Already passed in the lower house, the National Assembly, the Constitutional Council will be the last to rule. The ban has little doubt of passing, as it manages to avoid the words "Muslim," "women," and "veils." However, it is clear who the ban is aimed at. Islam is France's number two religion, and mosques, etc are already seen as subjects of hate. France argues that this ban will promote the nation's values and sense of fraternity. It hopes to break gender barriers and promote equality. On the one hand, this sounds like an okay idea, promoting women's rights to show their faces. However, this is an oversimplification. The Islamic religion is a lot more complicated than I believe many of the creators of this ban are addressing. Upon hearing of the ban, many women vowed to stay in the privacy of their own homes so they would not have to show their faces in public. This sounds like more of a negative effect than positive. It is spectated that there is already "Islamophobia" in France, and this is just a step in the direction of smothering the religion. Shouldn't people have the right to worship their own religion? The way I see it, you are not hurting anyone by wearing a face veil, and therefore you should be allowed to wear it. I understand if France is truly trying to promote equality for women, but something tells me its motives are a little different.
15 comments:
The motives of this ban confuse me. I always thought that promoting equality was to give people the freedom to do something, not to ban them from doing something. I don't think that this is a very good way to break down gender barriers...
I believe that this ban is a way to protect women. If a women is seen wearing them then there is a high possibility that Anti-Islamic people will harass/ threaten this woman with the veil. In this case France is taking the decision that the security of the women is more important then the right to visibly practice there religion. The French government is far from banning Islam or the religious practice of it. Also it is impossible to impose American ideals onto the french system.
I do not believe that this is the way to protect Muslim women in society. By banning the veil, France is showing religious intolerance by preventing a group of people from practicing something that is a part of their culture. Many Muslims wear veils for their religion; banning them is like banning Christmas trees for Christians. The veil is a part of Muslim culture. Also,if the French are saying the argument for this law is that it promotes equality, it doesn't look like their ideals are much different from ours. So this is not a case of Americans imposing their ideals on the French system.
I am very pleased that Courtney brought up this issue. I heard about this controversy today on NPR. Indeed, this law "[intends] to break gender barriers and promote equality" as Courtney mentioned. However, is it really constitutional (in France in this case)to ban a women's right to choose and right to express their religious values? Regardless of the minority of women who actually wear a veil in France (I believe the figure was less than 5% of women who are Muslim), it is truly unjust, as Courtney clearly mentions, to allow such a law to pass.
Furthermore, I would like to build off of this idea of "Islamophobia." Not only have we seen recent examples of "Islamophobia" in the U.S., but we are now seeing similar trends across the globe, particularly in Europe. This article...
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/world/europe/18iht-muslims.3939208.html
...demonstrates the trend (although this article was written in 2006, it is clear from this post that Islamophobia is incessantly becoming more commonplace).
I find it extremely appalling that religious differences have become a part of societal issues. And I find it even more appalling that such social issues and Islamophobic ideas are now influencing a government's policy
@Rashmi:
While a high majority of people view the Muslim veil as a religious symbol & a representation of religious freedom, the veil is far from this; in fact, throughout history, the Muslim veil has continuously been a symbol of servitude and humiliation as well as a symbol of male dominance over women.
To exemplify, the Koran states specifically that "Allah condemns those men who act in a womanlike manner, and those women who behave or act in a man like manner." In this sense, one of the original purposes of the veil was preventing a woman from choosing the way she would like to dress, a bold representation of this male dominance over women, albeit a simple one.
Furthermore, while the newly enacted French law may have moved too quickly and been slightly radical, it still carries out the central idea of protection for Muslim women, something that they are yet to fully enjoy, even after ages and ages. The French legislature has moved in the right direction; the only problem now is presenting it in an acceptable way.
@Rashmi
To add onto Ryan’s excellent point: Let’s examine the original purposes of the veil. “O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters, and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies, that is more proper that they may be distinguished and not molested. And Allah is Most Forgiving and Most Merciful.” This is a quote taken directly (translated) from the Quran, and it is often used by proponents of how the veil does not imply that women must be subservient to man. The argument they use is that the veil promotes modesty and safety. But let’s take a look at it from a modern context, especially applicable in France, a very flamboyant country. In France, the veil is nothing close to modest; it sticks out, especially with only 1900 people out of 6 million Muslims choosing to wear it. And what does this sticking-out do but leave the women at the mercy of anti-Muslim sentiments? I agree with the rest of the commenters, there has been a rise in “islamaphobia,” but is this law really driven by it? Is it, in fact, driven by a desire to help Muslim woman live with the same protection the veil offered in ancient times? I think so, I think that this law promotes safety, and has little to do with religious intolerance.
While there are those who might interpret the banning of full Muslim veils as a violation of "freedom of expression" (specifically expression of religion), the actions taken by the French Senate are a reflection of the sentiments by the French people toward Islamic customs and as others have previously stated, we cannot expect the French to stand up to American law. Because one cannot wear a full Muslim veil doesn't mean that they cannot practice their religion as fervently as before. France is a modernized nation and veils are symbolic of nations controlled by male chauvinists, if veil-wearers in France truly want to wear veils, then I see no reason why they can't move back to the denigrated societies from whence they came for greater liberties. If veil-wearers want to reside in France, then they will have to live according to French customs, and if not then there are many other nations in which they can freely put on their veil, and express themselves more "freely".
But how does this law protect those 1900 women at all? If veils indeed are as uncommon as you say, then there would be minimal societal and cultural pressure from those around them to wear a veil, meaning that they probably wear one voluntarily. They could just as easily not wear one if they wanted to avoid such "anti-Muslim sentiments" aimed at them. But again, they do choose to wear one so that should be their right to religious expression.
-Anthony Lu
I'm not really following your argument, but I'll try to respond, sorry. The veil is not required, but we don't know for sure that they are or are not choosing it based on their own free will, anti-muslim sentimism in that area is a fact though. Also, only very strict islamic followers absolutely require full-body veils to be worn, so it would make sense that only a small portion of the population is forced to wear it. But that last part is completely conjecture. Only the anti-islam sentiment is fact.
I could not agree more with Ryan and Dan about the veils place and purpose in the Islamic faith. I can personally affirm their points about the veil from what i have been told my dad and family in Malaysia have told me. My relatives in Malaysia are devout Muslims who at the time when my father, my aunts, and my uncles were growing up a headscarf and veil were in no way mandatory in public or at home. It has only been over the past decade or two that the headscarf has become so prominent in Islamic culture. This whole new phase has really been pushed on by radical Muslim who in many places are merging into the government to force their beliefs onto others. Anyways I'm beginning to digress but my main point is that while the French law is a little radical and out of left field it is not completely irrational in a time and place where many Europeans (French in particular) are feeling that their culture and way of life are being threatened by the concessions made to religions as a result of the rights to freedom.
I think that this law goes too far in trying to impose specific standards of equality on Muslim women in France. I believe that it's Muslim women's prerogative whether or not to wear their veils. However, Tony raised an interesting difference in French and American interpretations of "equality" that I studied in a legal studies course two summers ago. As of now, the veils are banned in all French public schools; the argument goes that despite the best efforts of society, women who wear the veils will inevitably be discriminated again by teachers, faculty, etc. By banning the veils, similar to imposing a school uniform, ethnicity, class, and gender will be less important in defining a person. I support this measure of equality in schools, where one's perception is arguably important for establishing a future.
However, I believe this law is too extreme in that it denies fully developed adults the right to fully express themselves and their religion. If it's their choice to wear the veil, it's their choice regardless of how "misogynistic" or "unequal" it may seem.
I can see where Dan and Ryan are coming from. Yes, the veil can be interpreted as a symbol of "servitude and humiliation" and I do not deny such a statement. However, we few Bay Area Americans cannot possibly comprehend the reasons why those 1900 women choose to wear such, regardless of the veil's symbolism.
I could not agree with Peter more that "this law is too extreme in that it denies fully developed adults the right to fully express themselves and their religion."
Dan posed the question whether or not this law was related to Islamophobia. While it seems difficult to ascertain whether or not it is related, the increasing Islamophobia in France does provide some evidence. I have made several trips to France and have talked with many French families regarding such matters, specifically one that does practice Islam. The family did note that in France, there tends to be discrimination against Muslims. Although there are no examples of severe Islamophobia, much of the French population do not always consider Muslims as French, but rather "Moroccan" or "Algerian" when families of those nationalities practices Islam (even when they are born in France!). It is just something to keep in mind...
It's ironic that France wants to promote "equality" by banning something that is very important to a religion. Most women will probably avoid going out in public due to this law, so it actually hinders the whole idea of equality. This is only going to produce more resentment from Muslims. It shows France's religious intolerance. The Muslim veil is a sign of respect and the government should not show any sort of religious intolerance no matter the intent.
Everyone's a critic.
If France decides that they should ban a certain style of clothing, then who are we to tell them that they shouldn't do that? We grew up under the "veil" (get it?) of equality. Simply because we believe that it doesn't follow our American system, doesn't mean that it goes against what they believe is most beneficial for the country.
Post a Comment