Ad for Idea Lobby blogger Emily Badger
Monday, February 13, 2012   |  Miller-McCune Homepage

close this window


We encourage you to share any articles or material you find on Miller-McCune.com with friends and colleagues. Please fill in the fields below with the name and e-mail address. Then fill in the same information for you. Miller-McCune will not keep any information about you or your friend, and the e-mail your friends receive will appear to have come from your e-mail address. The asterisk (*) denotes a required field.


From:





To:







European Dispatch

May 5, 2010

Banning Burqas on Both Sides of the Atlantic

European officials aren’t the only Westerners wrestling with what Islamic women wear — leaders in Quebec have joined the fray.


| PRINT | SHARE

A fad for outlawing Muslim veils has swept northern Europe this spring. France is on the verge of following Belgium with a bill to force veil-wearing Muslim women to uncover their faces in public or government-managed areas. President Nicolas Sarkozy, who’s backing a bill the French parliament will consider this month (May), has claimed the ban is not in any way an attack on Islam. The veils “do not pose a problem in a religious sense,” Sarkozy spokesman Luc Chatel said in April, “but threaten the dignity of women.”

Most Americans might see this European trend as a strange encroachment of personal freedom in the name of “upholding Western values.” But a North American government is caught up in the same fervor: The Canadian province of Quebec has also prepared a bill to outlaw covering one’s face when dealing with government workers — meaning in government jobs, government job interviews, or even in private work for companies that do business with Quebec officials.

This ban would be mild compared to the French bill, which seeks to unveil women in public areas from government offices to city buses. But the justifications are the same.

“It is an effort to promote or enhance racial and gender equality,” wrote a commentator for the Toronto Sun, Peter Worthington, in late April. “Having to do business with someone who refuses to have their face seen, is offensive and demeaning – to both parties. Ours is a society that prides itself on face-to-face dealings. …”

In other words: Don’t freak us out with your weird medieval clothes.

Worthington is right that doing business with a woman in a veil is bound to seem strange and even, to some people, demeaning. But his arguments are emotional, and “pride in face-to-face dealings” is not a principle of law.

The principle at work in France is la laïcité, the doctrine of secularism codified in the French Constitution. It’s a young and generally healthy tradition of distance from the Catholic Church. France’s devotion to its legal system rivals American love for the U.S. Constitution, and one way of redefining what it means to be “French” in this era of Muslim immigration to Europe has been a return to ideals of citizenship.

The principle at work in North America is religious freedom, which is strong in the United States for obvious reasons; it’s also guaranteed in Canadian law. “All Canadians, whether Muslim or not, are guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms the freedom of religion and conscience,” the Muslim Council of Montreal has declared, rather sensibly. “The state has no business in the wardrobes of the nation.”

The Quebec law will try to dodge this problem by failing to mention burqas, niqabs, veils or religion at all. But then the lawmakers will have to explain why a state in Canada can tell its people what to wear.

Burqas and other full-face coverings belong to small, conservative wings of Islam that are alien even to most of the Muslims who live in North America or Europe, which is the reason some moderate Muslims have come out against them, too. They suggest a backward notion of women — a fear of their bodies, a prudeness long gone from our society — that can’t be defended in terms of Western values.

But it simply isn’t true that every woman in a burqa has been forced into it by a man. A number of Muslim women wear the veil willingly, so until the Western laws deal directly with the oppression of women, instead of symbolic veils, they won’t have much foundation in Western tradition, either.


For more, read our Islam and anti-Muslim fear in America article on Miller-McCune.com


The riots across France in 2005 and 2006 were a good indication of how well French ideals of citizenship have worked in practice. French-born Muslim teenagers, the children of generally North African immigrants, learn about French ideals in school — liberté, egalité, fraternité — but find themselves excluded from jobs when they graduate, because of their religion or the color of their skin. That was the emotional reason for the violence, which resembled American race riots from a generation before.

A law against full-face veils will probably lead to the ridiculous spectacle, someday in Paris or Quebec, of a Muslim woman standing up for Western freedoms by stepping onto a bus in a burqa and then refusing, like Rosa Parks, to leave. In this sense, America has plenty to teach both the Europeans and the Quebecois.

“Either Europe develops and supports the idea of a mixed culture, or Europe has no future,” Abdelkarim Carrasco, a Muslim leader in Spain, told the Associated Press in 2005. It’s always hard to hear lectures on your own society from an outsider, but Carrasco was right. “Europe has to learn from what the United States has done,” he said. “It is a country that has taken in people from all over the world.”

Sign up for the free Miller-McCune.com e-newsletter.

“Like” Miller-McCune on Facebook.

Follow Miller-McCune on Twitter.

Add Miller-McCune.com news to your site.

Subscribe to Miller-McCune

 

word on the street

Post your comment here
  • Sexist is as Sexist does.

    What is the intent of these female coverings?

    To protect the women from the men who cannot control themselves if they see female flesh?

    Some of that French devotion to citizenship should apply in USA.

  • Jenna

    What is the intent of these female coverings?

    -To hold women responsible for the actions of men by claiming that their bodies and hair might incite a man to such heights of lust that he will be compelled to rape her.

    -To deny women their own personal identity and personhood. When you mask someone, you make them not only unidentifiable, but also an nonentity.

    -To further inhibit the free movement and congress of women. One cannot see or hear well while her face and head are completely covered.

    While I hold with religious freedom and have no problem with a woman covering her hair and body for modesty’s sake, I DO have a problem when an abusive and dehumanizing practice is condoned and allowed in the name of tradition. Covering the face is not required in Islamic teaching or law. It is a traditional way of segregating and subduing women and should not be tolerated in a free society.

  • dprosenthal

    The full face covering is not a symbol of religious observance but an example of the Muslim time-honored practice of subjugating women. These women are considered property – the husband is free to abuse his wife, both physically and sexually, and to sell off their young daughters to perverted older men as ‘wives’. Females have no value except as servants and sex objects and live lives not much better than slaves.
    Note the statement by the husband whose wife was fined for wearing burqa – ‘I will be forced to CONFINE my wife to home’. Pets and farm animals may be confined to home, not human beings.

  • Andy in Germany

    “Europe isn’t the only Western nation wrestling with what Islamic women wear — Canada’s Quebec province has joined the fray.”

    ‘Europe’ is not a nation. It’s a continent or a bloc of nations.

  • Marwan Asmar

    The attack on the veil is nothing but an attack on Islam. Muslims have long lived in Europe, so has veiling, so has the burqa, so why know take a stance against these. The move or moves are politically motivated against communities who are no longer seen as useful in society. You can’t induce integration or “pliancy” by force, such communities have lived in Europe for a long-time, they are part of the social, economic and even political fabric of society. It is wrong now for the European political establishments to see “oh we don’t like the way you dress, so we are going to force you to take off”. Europe has to live up to its civic and moral responsibility, and live with a situation it willingly accepted in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s when it was economically prudent. To come now and so “no we not going to accept differences in style” is racist, morally corrupt and goes against the very notions of democracy, liberalism and human rights that are preached by the very politicians who want to ban religious symbols.

  • Pingback: Big Love Soaking the State | Miller-McCune Online

  • Sexism is Burqa

    Accepting the coverings for women is sexist. When it was accepted before, it was sexist then.
    A Ban on burqas would apply regardless of the race of the woman.

    Like debates on immigration policy in USA, when one side runs out of arguments, they just play the racist card.

more in this section

also by this author

Michael Scott Moore

Michael Scott Moore was a 2006-2007 Fulbright fellow for journalism in Germany, and The Economist named his surf travelogue, "Sweetness and Blood," a ...

Something’s Fishy About That Red Snapper

Preventing seafood fraud won’t be easy, but a new law has potential to stop fish poaching and laundering, which involves mislabeling fish in restaurants.

Russian Gas and the Cost of Germany’s Energy Revolution

Doing deals with the Russians to put a pipe under the North Sea gives Germany some flexibility in its post-nuclear future, but at what price?

Last Charge of the (Incandescent) Light Brigade

The movement to change your incandescent light bulbs for compact fluorescents completed its successful European Union campaign. The United States is next.

German Conservatives Discover Populism In Euro Crisis

Like the homemakers in the book “Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay,” the bureaucrats running Germany’s financial house are saying enough is enough.

The Greening of Angela Merkel

German Chancellor (and physicist) Angela Merkel did a 180 on nuclear energy after Fukushima, setting off an “energy revolution” in the process.

Receive 1 year (6 issues) of our print magazine for just $14.95. Miller-McCune features polished, in-depth reports on research and solutions across the policy spectrum — from health care, education and energy to international affairs, poverty and the global economy. It's a must read for well-informed and solutions-driven individuals.

Loading

follow us on:

join our newsletter:

from the source

Gender Wage Gap Skewed By Survey Flaws

The wage gap between the sexes in America has been closing much faster than anyone realized, but that’s tempered by learning it’s been much wider than measurements had shown.

‘Orcas as Slaves’ Argument Sinks

An effort to identify five performing orcas as slaves failed in part, argues one scholar, because there’s no legal precedent establishing them as persons.

The Perceived Delicacy of the Female Conductor

New research finds listeners judge symphonic music differently when they’re told the conductor is a woman.

House Puts Transportation in Partisan Crossfire

Transportation used to be one of the few guaranteed areas of agreement when ideology trumped pragmatism in D.C. But that’s no longer the case.

Pressure to Conform Can Inspire Creativity

New research suggests less-creative people do more innovative thinking when they are told individualism is the norm, and instructed to conform.