French President Sarkozy Wants to Ban Burkas

I don’t have a problem with this too much. There is no real secular equivalent to the burka. Any other garment or set of garments that completely covers like that is limited to specialty professions and are immediately identifiable as such. Further, nobody is going to wear those type of clothes out to the mall. They are for completing the tasks that they are necessary for.

Surgical masks do not hide the sex, race, eye color, and other defining characteristics of an individual like a burka does. A woman, (or man for that matter) in a burka is an ambulatory pile of fabric. The fact that it is religiously motivated should not except muslims from reasonable, and completely un-intrusive security measures that we all experience as part of society. Simply being able to identify the basic features of a person to police can be of great help in locating a missing person.

[del]I live in an area settled by Mennonites & the like. It’s not just Near Eastern cultures wherein women cover their heads. I’d be leery of trying to pass such a law here.

That said, I have no desire to tell the French not to do this. Not my country, & the right to cover one’s… head is not an absolute[/del]…wait.

Burqas! Not hijab, not chador, not even abaya! Oh, yeah, Ban those puppies! That’s too dangerous a way to hide your identity!

Here’s why this is stupid. The idea of the ban is to protect the women in question, right? Okay, you’ve got a guy who insists that his wife and/or daughters wear a full burqa. To this guy, wearing anything less is tantamount to walking around nude. If France outlaws this mode of dress, does anyone really think that this guy is going to think, “Well, I guess the burqa’s out. Fadima, here’s some cash, go buy yourself some miniskirts.” No, what’s going to happen is he’s going to think, “This country is clearly too debased for my wife and daughter to live in. I’m shipping her back to Saudi Arabia, where women are properly modest.” Maybe he goes with her, maybe he stays. But this law passes, and you’ll see the burqa disappear from France, along with the women inside them. Maybe it’s just me, but I prefer a woman’s chances in a burqa in France, than in a burqa in Saudi Arabia. As long as she in France, she’s still got the option of taking the damned thing off.

Shah Amanullah of Afghanistan outlawed it in 1928 (and did a lot of other things to promote equal rights), but the law was reversed after his abdication.

I am an (non-Muslim) immigrant of Pakistani extraction, living in the United States. I used to live a few houses down from a family of Guyanese Muslims. This is how their domestic disagreement about modest dress was resolved.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1298&dat=19900110&id=L1QQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xIsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4653,1348046

Trust me. There are thousands of Muslim women living in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia etc who are not choosing to wear the Hijab. The fact that your husband can go to prison if he kills you does not do much to reduce your fear if you believe that he will kill you anyway. Once you are dead, his punishment does you no good. If he believes that controlling his wife and daughters sexuality is the end-all and be-all of human existence, he is not going to be deterred by even the certainty of a prison sentence.

Given that in Europe there are virtual “ghettoes” of Muslims, it is probably even worse there.

In Pakistan, there are thousands of cases of women dying in “cooking accidents” which is shorthand for being burned to death by your husband, father or in-laws. The police do nothing to investigate, ESPECIALLY if the victim was, well, a “harlot” according to the standards of the family.

Kemel Atatürk before that I believe, along with the Fez hat. But what people have said is true: enforcing ‘freedom’ never made anybody free, The result in Turkey was to clear women off the streets because no respectable woman would dream of showing her bare face.

Much as I dislike the burqa, certain misconceptions about it are every bit as paternalistic telling women what they should want and why as the Saudi government, perhaps more. Remove the veil and the woman’s dress is little different from traditional Arab men’s robes. Nobody goes on about those being ‘oppressive’.

Mark Tully, the BBC’s Indian correspondant for years has short stories where in one, the matriarch of the old Muslim family come down in the world that now has to rely on the relatives they despised for moving to Pakistan remenisces about the Glory Days of the British Raj when her aunt not only wore a burqa covered in embroidery and jewellery worth a fortune but had her own railway carriage with blinds pulled down which she boarded through a screened path to protect Her Mightiness from the insolent gaze of lowly porters and stone-worshippers (Hindus). On the few occasions that I’ve seen a woman dressed like this - some in black, some in white - they scare the hell out of me looking like the Spanish Inquisition!

Back about 1964 the fashion designer Mary Quant (she of the PVC miniskirt - yum!) was raving on how in the future women would go pretty much naked with their pubic hair dyed and shaved to attractive designs. How would ‘our’ women feel if a mob of foreign Quants decreed they must ‘liberate’ themselves from the implied shame of covering their body and go naked?

According to one well-researched historical fiction author (Dorothy Dunnett) there were African Muslims who interpreted the Qur’anic injunction (for [ii]both* sexes) to dress modestly as going naked as Allah formed them without ‘fripperies’ (though for men not quite as Allah formed them!). (African Gold in her House of Niccolò 15th century multinational trading octology).

And according to one Egyptian feminist, Egyptian women have been beleagured with westerners telling them to ‘loosen up’ since days when the westerners were fainting in the heat from the constriction of laced corsets and multiple petticoats, entirely unconcerned with matters of relations between the sexes, political power, poverty, the obscenity of female ‘circumcision’ common in Africa and among Egyptian Christians, and a host of issues far more important than clothes.

I agree with Sarkozy’s attitude of When in Paris do as the Parisians do or don’t come and he is not rounding on a minority with a long history of cultural difference like Jews. At the same time, revolutionary opposition to a religion solidly behind the old feudal system, when they rededicated cathedrals as Temples to Reason and had sex on the High Altar are 200 years ago.

Speaking for the vast, crushing majority of muslims, Burqas and Niqabs have no place in society and I support Sarkozy on this. If a woman wants to cover her hair, I’ll tolerate it (though I intensely dislike it. It fosters hypocrisy and self-righteousness) but the face must remain uncovered.

This is my world too and If a woman really wants to dress like a ninja or a black ghost in public, she must carry smoke bombs and be willing to fight me at a moment’s notice. Otherwise, she can stay home.

What does it mean to “take freedom” on one’s own? I think it would be very difficult for a woman who wore the burka to up and decide she wouldn’t wear it any longer. I’m willing to bet she would face a lot of family and social ostracization if she were to “take” this “freedom”. What if her family kicked her out of the house? Maybe she wouldn’t have money to support herself. What if her decision meant that she would lose her kids? She could decide her newfound “freedom” almost impossible to pursue. “Freedom” for black slaves was technically “forced” on the southern US states after the Civil War. With the benefit of hindsight, was this not a positive development for human rights? I’m sure slave owners felt tyrannized by the northern states, that their “freedom” to own slaves was being compromised. I think Sarkozy was right in that he’s making this a WOMEN’S issue - which puts it above and beyond ethnicity and religion. I’m the first one to defend individual rights to most, and am extremely cautious about any government intrusion upon any of my turf. Whatever anyone says about personal choice, separation of church and state etc., I’m PERSONALLY INSULTED when I see these shackles.

Do you honestly think that women are just going to throw off their burqas and say YAY!!! just like that? What about women who wear them of their choosing?

Do you have any answers to some of the problems and issues we’ve mentioned? If you do, let’s see 'em. (As for you comparison to slavery, I think we’re comparing apples to oranges)

As begbert said, you’re treating the symptom – not the problem.

Well, let’s hope the burqa gets banned PDQ so that you won’t have to be personally insulted at the oppression that’s in your face every time you look at the burqa. Oh sure, once the burqa’s gone, the oppression will continue at its merry little oppressive pace, but hey, as long as you don’t have to look at it, that’s OK, right? You can just forget allllllll about female oppression, which I might add, doesn’t actually need a burqa, or religion, or your permission to come onto your “personal turf,” wherever that might be, but even if it is right in your face, as long as it’s invisible, who really cares? I mean, except for the oppressed women, but fuck them, right? As long as they’re not offending you with their clothing styles.

That’s the beauty of treating symptoms. Even if the disease doesn’t go away, you can pretend it did and you’re all better, right?

I’d say you are correct if you take the short term view. Yes, it was self defeating for the shah. But I’m taking the long term view on behalf of the liberation of women. Explain the boldness of Iranian women, who learned to protest under the shah against the ban and now against the present religious authority. Why are these particular middle east muslim women so up front with their political position?

I’d say breaking the society rule for wearing it is the beginning of liberating women from accepting their secondary subservient role in society.

The burka goes way beyond self expression. It is a tool of a particular group of people capable of coercing women to wear it either by brainwashing or by simple force. I don’t want to see masochistic women wear dog collars in public either.

They’re up front for a variety of reasons, but the simple refusal to wear the veil isn’t one of them. It’s an article of clothing, not an evil talisman.

But here’s the point, Dutchman: Even after you get rid of the burqa, the brainwashing and the simple force are still going to be there! You are interfering with religion to ban women from wearing an article of clothing, and it’s not going to make a damn bit of difference. If you really cared about the plight of muslim women, there are plenty of methods to go after the abusive men. It’s not as easy as going after the women or the clothing, however, and that’s why the idea outlawing the burqa is so popular in the legislature. It’s the easy way out. Even if it doesn’t actually solve anything, it’s the path of least resistance.

No, I don’t think women are just going to throw off their burqas and say “Yay”, that’s exactly my point. It wouldn’t be as easy as you made it sound by saying a person had to “take freedom” on their own. That’s all lofty and heroic and courageous, similar to (ahem) much historical/political rhetoric. I think women don’t really have a CHOICE when the only culture you know of, the one that raised you, requires you to wrap yourself in a hideous restrictive shroud. Yes, I do have answers to some of the problems that have been mentioned - my answer is that I don’t see any problem with Sarkozy’s position. If I were a Frenchwoman at this time, Muslim or not, burka wearing or not, I would feel validated and protected. I honestly don’t think comparing the French burka issue to slavery is like comparing apples to oranges at all - why don’t you tell me how you think it is?. Finally, the symptom is the problem. Please tell me how it’s not.

And how does forcing the removal of the burqa by legislation remedy any of that?

Wow, do you ever suck at analogies!

Legally, (at the moment) a Muslim woman in France has every right to wear, or not wear a burqa. Yes, there are social barriers to her exercising that freedom. This law is not going to fix that. Husbands who murder their wives because the woman is acting “immorally” are not going to turn into Alan Alda because Sarkozy passed this law. That kind of man isn’t going to shrug his shoulders and let his wife out in public “naked.” He’s going to lock her in the house, and not let her out until he can arrange a plane flight back to the Middle East. This law is going to have the practical effect of stripping these women of what little freedoms they are able to win from their families. You’re getting these women from both ends. Legally speaking, you’re stripping their rights by limiting their expression of religion. And practically speaking, you’re stripping their rights by putting them in an even more impossible situation with their families, while doing sweet fuck-all to remedy the actual problems in their lives.

You really think it’s the burqa that’s the shackle? Guess again, sweetheart. All this law does is take something nasty, and hide it away where you don’t have to look at it. It doesn’t do a damn thing to make anyone’s life any better. Except yours, of course - because God forbid you should have to see something that makes you PERSONALLY INSULTED.

As it was pointed out, this HAS been tried in the past, btw – banning traditional Islamic clothing, and it was a dismal failure.
What about trying to educate women in the first place, and find out WHY they wear them – of their own free choice (in which case, that should BE their right), or those who are forced to. If the latter, then maybe we can get to the root cause. But no, I guess that’s too hard.

You know, I’m getting tired of typing the same thing over and over again. I’m just going to paraphrase what I’ve already said:

But here’s the point, honey6: Even after you get rid of the burqa, the brainwashing and the simple force are still going to be there! You are interfering with religion to ban women from wearing an article of clothing, and it’s not going to make a damn bit of difference. If you really cared about the plight of muslim women, there are plenty of methods to go after the abusive men. It’s not as easy as going after the women or the clothing, however, and that’s why the idea outlawing the burqa is so popular in the legislature. It’s the easy way out. Even if it doesn’t actually solve anything, it’s the path of least resistance.

and . . .

Well, let’s hope the burqa gets banned PDQ so that you won’t have to be personally insulted at the oppression that’s in your face every time you look at the burqa. Oh sure, once the burqa’s gone, the oppression will continue at its merry little oppressive pace, but hey, as long as you don’t have to look at it, that’s OK, right? You can just forget allllllll about female oppression, which I might add, doesn’t actually need a burqa, or religion, or your permission to come onto your “personal turf,” wherever that might be, but even if it is right in your face, as long as it’s invisible, who really cares? I mean, except for the oppressed women, but fuck them, right? As long as they’re not offending you with their clothing styles.

Hint: Read the stuff I bolded in the last paragraph. That’s where I reveal the big secret about the difference between symptoms and problems.

All clothing is oppressive and should be abolished. Clothed people are masochists and should be forcibly freed from their torture.

But seriously, public nudity is a fundamental individual right that should not be infringed.

Les vêtements, c’est la tyrannie!

Fuck, yeah!! I can get behind that. In fact, depending on the naked person in question, I can get behind that so much that the police might have to separate us with a crowbar before they can get the cuffs on. (Sorry, Jaques, I guess I shouldn’t have drunk all that wine for breakfast!)

I mean, unless you weigh 400 pounds or something. Then you’re infringing on my right as a Frenchman not to be forced to throw up all the snails I ate for lunch.

Naww, I’m just kidding. I’m not really French.

For the sake of argument, give me one or two.

Tell that to the Mormons of Utah.

I’m listening.

Its the easy way, so why make it hard.

I’m thinking of the hardline muslim man who wants to subjugate his wife into total submission by denying her the freedom to express herself and make herself fully known to others who can appreciate her as well . Only because of the ban she has an opportunity to escape the chains and develop herself into the person that she can be.

F*** him !

I don’t know about you, Honey6, but I’d worry less about burqas, and more about so-called female “circumcision.” I think that’s far, FAR more of an issue than clothing right now.