[BLOG-LIKE POSTING] 21st Century Laicity
Dec. 12th, 2003 05:12 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldFrom an article in The Guardian about the recent decision in France to ban the wearing of head scarves in public schools:
There has been a fair bit of discussion on the subject over at the Head Heeb. Increasingly and to my surprise, I find myself leaning in the direction of prohibiting the hijab in public schools, in light of these pressures and the above described misogyny. Women aren't "jewels" to be held at a remove in awe in the palm of a man's hand, and they certainly aren't "whores" if they don't cover their bodies completely: Women are people.
I oppose permitting the hijab in public schools for the same reason that I oppose, say, publically-funded religious schools persecuting gay students, or religious authorities in Israel making civil marriage impossible for the simple reason that this represents an unnecessary intrusion of a conservative dogma into the public sphere, forcing homogenization on people unwilling or unable to cope. Once you allow the reactionaries' views to become mainstream, you risk intimidating people who don't want to follow the reactionaries into following their line.
Not all Muslim women want to be pressured to wear the hijab; not all non-heterosexual students know about their sexuality in high school; not all Israelis who want to marry across religious lines can get to Cyprus. Forcing these people by default to submit to local religious and social dogmas which close off their development as free and independent personalities is simply wrong, and should not be tolerated in the public sphere.
Vive la laîcité!
ADDENDUM: The hijab, incidentally, differs from authentically religious headgear--the Jewish skullcap, the Sikh turban, et cetera--in that it is a cultural institution aimed at limiting the exposure of the female body to a degree unthought of among males, and hence, their visibility and potential autonomy as individuals. Compare the role of the veil in Western culture among women, whether we are talking about the white veil still often worn by brides at their wedding ceremonies or the black veils once worn by new widows.
In some urban ghettos, meanwhile, young Muslim women are forced to cover up and lower their eyes before men; otherwise ``they are stigmatized as 'whores,''' the report said. It added that preteen girls are sometimes forced to wear head scarves, and that some fathers or husbands have refused to let male doctors treat their wives or daughters in hospitals.
[. . .]
Women ``are emeralds, jewels - the more they are shielded, the more beautiful they become. They lose their luster if they are outdoors,'' said Riadh Chabaoui, in his 20s. ``In religious life, women must wear veils.''
Mohammed, who wouldn't give his full name, said legislating against head scarves would backfire. He said he tells his wife that she's beautiful in her scarf because it is ``the flag of all Muslims.''
``If you make me choose between breaking the law and breaking the Quran, I'll break the law,'' he said, referring to the Muslim holy book. ``Today, they forbid us from wearing veils. Tomorrow, they'll forbid us from being Muslims.''
There has been a fair bit of discussion on the subject over at the Head Heeb. Increasingly and to my surprise, I find myself leaning in the direction of prohibiting the hijab in public schools, in light of these pressures and the above described misogyny. Women aren't "jewels" to be held at a remove in awe in the palm of a man's hand, and they certainly aren't "whores" if they don't cover their bodies completely: Women are people.
I oppose permitting the hijab in public schools for the same reason that I oppose, say, publically-funded religious schools persecuting gay students, or religious authorities in Israel making civil marriage impossible for the simple reason that this represents an unnecessary intrusion of a conservative dogma into the public sphere, forcing homogenization on people unwilling or unable to cope. Once you allow the reactionaries' views to become mainstream, you risk intimidating people who don't want to follow the reactionaries into following their line.
Not all Muslim women want to be pressured to wear the hijab; not all non-heterosexual students know about their sexuality in high school; not all Israelis who want to marry across religious lines can get to Cyprus. Forcing these people by default to submit to local religious and social dogmas which close off their development as free and independent personalities is simply wrong, and should not be tolerated in the public sphere.
Vive la laîcité!
ADDENDUM: The hijab, incidentally, differs from authentically religious headgear--the Jewish skullcap, the Sikh turban, et cetera--in that it is a cultural institution aimed at limiting the exposure of the female body to a degree unthought of among males, and hence, their visibility and potential autonomy as individuals. Compare the role of the veil in Western culture among women, whether we are talking about the white veil still often worn by brides at their wedding ceremonies or the black veils once worn by new widows.
