The French government proposed a ban on full body robes this week, referring specifically to the niqab, the head-to-toe covering worn by some Muslim women. The proposal compounds President Nicolas Sarkozy's comments last June when he told a Versailles parliament that such dress "is not welcome" in France. His comment begs the question: Is it the clothing or the Muslim underneath that is not welcome?
Filed by Jean-Francois Cope, the leader of Sarkozy's UMP party in the lower house of parliament, the ban reads, "No one may, in spaces open to the public and on public streets, wear a garment or an accessory that has the effect of hiding the face."
It's hard to imagine a ban like this flying in the U.S., where we extol personal freedom and rail against full-body pat downs at the airport. But even in France, this seems heavy-handed. There are an estimated 5 million Muslims living in France, the largest population of Muslims in Western Europe. If the ban goes through many Muslim women will have to decide between country or God.
The rationale for the ban on all face-covering clothes? "Public security concerns." This terminology, like most political jargon, avoids all challenges from those saying the law violates individual rights.
But I have to wonder, can children still wear face masks at parties? Can women wear wedding veils? What amount of tulle or lace is just too unsafe? Wedding veils and costume masks are an entirely separate issue, to be sure, but where do we draw the line, and when does it become racism?
The Associated Press reports Sarkozy is in full support of the ban, and even Andre Gerin, the head of the parliamentary panel set up to research the veils in question, called the veil an "attempt to instrumentalize Islam for political ends" with a "fundamentalist and barbaric ideology" that oppresses women.
Ask many a Muslim woman, and they will say they are not oppressed. In fact, the claim that Islam makes women "secondary citizens" is one many Muslim women on the UW-Madison campus dislike most. As part of a story on Madison's Muslim community, I spoke to Muslim women about their experiences wearing the veil, or hijab, in mainstream society. I did not speak to any women who wore the full-body veil, or niqab, the garment under attack in France, but all the women I spoke to echoed the same sentiments about the traditional coverings. Modesty, they say, ensures that their intellect, and not their bodies, make their successes in life. These women say Islam encourages women to seek higher education and pursue individual goals, rather than submit to a man.
Muslims in France and elsewhere have railed against the ban. Some of the opposition, however, fails to address the true issue--stigmatization of Muslims--and takes a stance that only perpetuates Muslim stereotypes. Case in point: The Associated Press reports anti-terrorism judge Marc Trevidic told a French newspaper that a ban "will maybe push impulsive people who want to commit attacks."
Really? Must we go straight to the Muslim-as-terrorist assumption? We do not assume that a ban on flag burning will incite mass arson. We did not prepare for a nuclear bomb in 2000 as we recounted the votes in Florida. Trevidic's reasoning does little to counter global fear of Muslims.
If passed, the ban would not go into effect until the spring, and it would be the second time France regulates Muslim dress. In 2004, France banned Muslim headscarves in the classrooms of French public schools.
Whether or not one agrees with the ban, let this be a lesson to us all to examine our rhetoric and the stereotypes we perpetuate.
Photo Credit: Rawa.org
No comments:
Post a Comment