P.S. I didn’t say the issue was only the headscarf; I said “As I understand it, the burka is under discussion in a very small minority of cases.” I work in the legal profession and therefore pick my words very carefully. And I’ve mentioned other forms of religious headgear as well, a subject which seems largely to have been dropped, and I addressed the burka issue as well.
WinstonSmith: first of all, I apologize for being hotheaded when I wrote those last two posts. As you might be able to tell, this issue really makes my blood boil.
If when I said “most”, I implied that I could speak authoritatively about how the majority of Muslim women feel about wearing the Hijab, I apologize for that as well. I certainly cannot. That’s not really the issue, though. Replace “most” with “some” or “many”, and my point is exactly the same - you can’t either, and when you consider that Muslim women see it in many different ways, it doesn’t make much sense to just write the Hijab off as a symbol of oppression.
Absolutely not. My line is that neither of us (or the French) have the authority or the right to say that the Hijab is forced on any particular Muslim woman, and thus have no authority or right to say she cannot wear it. At least not on those grounds. You ask what right I have to say the French are mistaken - the more pertinent question would be what right do they have to say that in the first place? The simple fact that the current French government may hold that line is neither explanation nor justification. I think to make such a judgement would be far more ethnocentric than anything either of us have said.
Yes. If the idea of French laicite is to make society less religious, even at the expense of individual liberties, simply forcing women to not wear an article of religious clothing isn’t going to accomplish anything! If the idea of the ban is to integrate Muslims into French society, attacking something as superficial as the Hijab is avoiding the real issues - the economic status of many immigrants, language, and the reconciliation of those Islamic values that are not completely in line with French society. And as Aldebaran deftly noted, the reaction of many Muslim families will be to send their girls to private schools, which will have the effect of further separating them from French society.
I can’t really do much but apologize for this. You’re exactly right, except about one thing. Saying that France maintains a pretense of individual rights and freedom of expression was not meant as a jab, although I can see how you thought it was one. I’m being completely serious - the rights of the individual are central to the French Constitution, are they not?
Muslim politicians are nowhere to be found in France.
Though the government had recently the controversial idea of appointing a muslim “prefet” (a high ranking civil servant representing the government in the equivalent of a county), which opened a whole new can of worms, since despite some (late) statements to the contrary, he was appointed precisely because he was muslim, which runs contrary to all tradition, and “reeks” (from a french point of view) of positive discrimination, an idea strongly frowned upon here.
These whole issues being, by the way, entangled in what is now an open rivalry between the ambitious minister of the interior and the president, both seeming to be engaged in a popularity (read populist) contest. This rivalry, and more generally, the competition between politicians from the majority party (UMP), who are already contemplating the next presidential election isn’t totally foreign to the current headscarf issue (nor to other controversial laws about for instance vagrancy, prostitution, etc…). Everybody wants to show that he’s the more commited to solve (as bluntly as possible) the issues that french people are supposed to be the most worried about.
To give an example concerning the muslim “prefet”, the minister first declared that the government had to appoint a muslim prefet (in order to show that the republic is very willing to integrate the muslims, doesn’t discriminate against them contrarily to the accusation of the contrary following the headscarf controversy, and to give a positive example to the youth muslim population). The president immediatly stated that this would run contrary to the traditions of the republic, that public servants should be appointed only on the basis of their competences, etc… And a couple weeks later, it appeared that a new “prefet” was appointed, and happened, out of sheer luck, to be a second generation muslim immigrant. The president is totally satisfied by this appointment, made of course only on the basis of the new “prefet” competences.
Oh! And as a result said “prefet” was targeted by a bombing (without any victim) some days later. The culprits being apparently extreme-right Breton independantists :rolleyes: (don’t ask me why, I’ve absolutely no clue…the whole thing is becoming ludicrously messy).
What about Dalil Boubakeur? He’s the rector of the Grand Mosque in Paris, and the French government would love for him to act as a sort of emissary to French Muslims, but people seem to write him off as a government puppet.
Doesn’t appear very likely. Most private schools in France are catholic (though since the catholic church is opposed to this new law, maybe they’ll welcome hijab-wearing students, but I’ve some doubts…besides, i’m not sure commited muslim believers would want to attend a catholic school). AFAIK, there are two muslim private school in France. One opened last year in northern France and , IIRC, has less than a dozen students, and the other one is situated in the island of the Reunion, in the Indian Ocean, so, I doubt many candidates from mainland France will enlist there.
AFAIK, most girls who have been excluded from public schools in relation to the hijab issue in the recent years have either joined another school, either chosen to follow long-distance teaching (by a public organism, by the way) from home. Though this certainly doesn’t help in integrating them, either.
He’s not exactly a government puppet (though the governement indeed rely quite a lot on him) . But there’s a lot of rivalry between the different muslim afffiliations in France, based mostly on two elements :
-
Moderate vs traditionnalists (Boubakeur is a moderate)
-
Possibly more important : influence games played by several governments of muslims countries (especially Morroco and Algeria, but they aren’t the only ones involved in the game), which back such or such movement, provide the imams, fund such or such mosque or organization, etc… (the great mosque of Paris is founded by Algeria)
As a result, Boubakeur is controversial for a significant part of the french muslim community who thinks that he managed to take over the newly created representative council of the muslim cult, and couldn’t care less about his statements. The muslim community in France is a long shot from being united, on any issue.
He’s not exactly a government puppet (though the governement indeed rely quite a lot on him) . But there’s a lot of rivalry between the different muslim afffiliations in France, based mostly on two elements :
-
Moderate vs traditionnalists (Boubakeur is a moderate)
-
Possibly more important : influence games played by several governments of muslims countries (especially Morroco and Algeria, but they aren’t the only ones involved in the game), which back such or such movement, provide the imams, fund such or such mosque or organization, etc… (the great mosque of Paris is funded by Algeria)
As a result, Boubakeur is controversial for a significant part of the french muslim community who thinks that he managed to take over the newly created representative council of the muslim cult, and couldn’t care less about his statements. The muslim community in France is a long shot from being united, on any issue.
Something I thought I should add : most of the french muslims actually aren’t very religious. A large part of them are only nominally so, vaguely believers but not actively practising their religion. I know quite a lot of muslims, most of them are believers, some of them follow the ramadan, very few actually pray regularily, none of them set a foot in a mosque.
So, you must keep in mind that a young girl actually following closely the tenets of her religion is rather an oddity over here, even amongst muslims. It seems to be part of a kind of recent revival of islam amongst second or third generation immigrants, and, I would suspect, a way of searching their roots for many who don’t really feel fully “french” (and aren’t really accepted as such, either) but on the other hand don’t have anymore any significant link with their country of origin, and not even, quite commonly, with their culture.
This means also that their statements about things like the hijab can come as a surprise even amongst the french muslims. And also that the authorities might be worried that this revival could be in part caused, or at least instrumentalized by radical or extremist muslims who have a tendancy to recruit in disfranchised neighborhoods.
Cite.
Please show me an opinion poll of “These girls”. Have you talked to them? How much do you know about peer pressure among high school girls when it comes to what they want to wear in school during the age of 13 through 17?
Unless you can prove otherwise by showing a credible opinion poll among “These girls”, then the following common sense argument applies:
1- The girls at that age want to wear what is “a la mode” in their age group in the French schools. There is a peer pressure at that age for conformity. Hijab is not “a la mode” for “These girls”. I doubt if many of them would want to wear the damn thing it if it was not forced or “encouraged” by their religious parents.
2- It is the parents of “These girls” that are forcing their values and belief systems down the throat of “These girls”. It is a systematic brainwashing by those parents, turning “These girls” into the slaves of Islamic male chauvinism and the parents’ religious belief system, forcing “These girls” to wear what they don’t really want to wear among their peers in school.
3- Just as many battered Islamic women would not admit they are being beaten by their men, if you try to get the true opinion of “These girls” about wearing hijab, you will probably end up with a distorted response due to their fear of retribution from their deeply religious parents. So, where is the freedom of expression by “These girls”?
The culprits are those religious parents who see nothing wrong in chauvinistically forcing their personal opinions and outdated belief systems down the throat of their innocent children, brainwashing them from early age. I say, if you are religious, keep your beliefs to yourself. Let your daughter grow up with no specific religion or hijab pressures until she reaches 18 and begins to evaluate and decide for herself if God or any religion should play a role in her life.
Yes. It is prima facie hypocrisy. French students (under the proposed law) can wear commonly accepted symbols of belief in Christ, but not commonly acceptable (and certainly not fear-inspiring in any way; if you’re really afraid of teenage girls in any style of clothing you have bigger issues than secularizing your state) symbols of belief in Allah and His Prophet and so on.
You make it sound as if France’s 8 million Muslims all showed up on the same boat. They’ve been immigrating for years, and how can you deny them a right to share in the established wealth of France? Their own territories were drained of all their resources for years by French colonial authorities.
You also make it sound as if the French are welcoming them wholeheartedly, which any (non-Muslim) Frenchman will tell you is bullshit . They hate the Algerians and they hate the Moroccans, and they’re quite happy to see the Front Nationale make a comeback if it can close the ports to further immigration.
Likewise, for your assertions: Cite?
See above. How much do you know about the opinions and level of genuine personal religious belief of teenage French Muslim girls? And how do you know it?
No, if you’re making controversial assertions, you have the obligation to back them up with something if you actually expect anyone to believe them, because obviously your version of “common sense” differs from that of several other posters in this thread, myself included.
“A la mode” means many different things to different people. High schools are full of subgroups and cliques. I’ve known a few French high school students in my time, and they dressed in all sorts of different ways. What the athletes wear is different from what the geeks wear, or what the artists wear, etc. And some people just like to dress differently from their peers just to stand out.
And would you have an issue with high school students wearing crucifixes or stars of David? Or would you equate that to evil, oppressive forced religious observance as well?
How do you know? Have you been in each and every one of these girls’ households? Have you talked to these girls and their parents? One French poster, who I’m guessing is closer to the actual events than you are, has already stated that hijab-wearing girls are a small minority even among French Muslims.
This statement sounds awfully bigoted to me. Or do you think that all Christian, or Jewish, or atheist women freely admit when they are being beaten by their men and prosecute every case to conviction? Thousands of police, attorneys, judges, and social workers will tell you otherwise.
If you ask them outside the presence of their parents, with the protection of anonymity, you are much more likely to get a straight answer. Have you done so? It’s common practice in, you know, opinion polling or other related sociological pursuits.
Funny, I’m sure plenty of people believe the same about Catholicism, or Judaism, or LDS, or pretty much any religion you can name. Or atheism, for that matter.
As has been discussed several times above, the very nature of observing the religious requirement makes the observance visible to others. Or are you advocating that hijab-wearing Muslim girls/women never leave their homes, so that nobody can see them?
You are free to let your own daughter do that.
Nothing much to add, I haven’t already done.
And this was in a response to Sine’s assertion that most women etc. In any case I don’t think European girls are substantial different from any other kind of girl. So if something proves to be disagreeable for someone in Tehran chances are the same thing will be disagreeable for her sister in Marseille. And while the situations naturally are far from the same, there’s no reason we can’t try to extract from one situation everything we can to teach us about another. Learn from history or repeat and all that.
In fact I don’t think I have stated my personal opinion anywhere and you just set me up with a strawman (or perhaps a strawmullah?). I think I’ll throw that one right back to you. Do you think parents should have unhindered right and an unlimited hand in deciding their children’s upbringing? Aren’t you your sister’s keeper? Will you complain if girls went topless to school in summer because they find it most natural and comfortable? (Well I wouldn’t, but a lot would without being called gynephobic or what not) There is no comparison with skirts and long-sleeved shirts because as this discussion makes quite clear - else we wouldn’t have it in the first place, the scarf and Burka etc. are clearly more that just innocent pieces of garment; they come loaded with religious, cultural and ideological baggage. If you don’t object to the scarf, perhaps you would to the black body robe leaving only the face, if not perhaps the Burka covering everything including the face with a grid, if not … At the end of the day, we are each others business. Few people would claim no restrictions should exist at all, it’s only a matter of where exactly we draw the line – but any place will be as arbitrary as another. No longer are children simply the property of their parents; they have rights ensured by society. Now society moves to widen those rights a bit, this is not an unheard of, revolutionary initiative, but simply another small step of a large number away from barbarism.
Can’t say I much favour it, but personally, I don’t really get my knickers all twisted over the scarf (not that I don’t think a ban would be mostly of the good). However, as I mentioned, I find the despicable restrictive full body robes and Burkas forced on children (and by legal or social pressure on women) an abomination. A disgrace screaming to heaven of cruelty and abuse, best compared with foot-binding and female genital mutilation. And would support a ban on those both in and outside public and private schools. A burka, besides all the implied ideological baggage and rubbish of extreme segregation, suppression, chauvinism, sexual implications, etc., is also physical much worse than long skirts and blouses because it restricts movement more, as well as sight and hearing.
Oh, I didn’t mean much of anything with those little remarks (least of all accusations of insensitiveness? I think sensitivity is much overvalued), except a bit of fun and as an opener to point out, that restrictions on clothes based on their sexiness, are no less arbitrary or objectively defendable than restrictions on religious garments – provided we don’t invoke the religious argument. (Btw. Never having been to America, 100% of Americans I have met were either travelling or emigrants. I have personally only ever known one American whom I stayed with for half a year in London, and she was a self-proclaimed communist and proselytizing atheist and from Florida no less. Extrapolating from her I’d venture a typical America is some kind of pagan commie with odd sexual habits and a weak spot for French champagne and all night techno raves. Probably she’s called Laura. Am I close?)
This is what a French friend tells me: There are very few Sikhs in France. Christians and Jews have historically learned to accept the restrictions of the secular Republic. Islam is a, historically speaking, fairly new element in French society and as such has yet to accommodate itself to secularism. Additional, small catholic medallions and crosses are not really interpreted as religious objects but merely jewellery neither prescribed nor demanded by Christian doctrine whereas scarves are bona fida religious symbols – wherefore they’re incompatible with the ideal of the irreligious public room. Moreover crosses are not considered conspicuous. Btw. The ban is not limited to the pupils. Also teachers (and other public functionaries) are restricted, and are so in several other European countries (a case from Austria went all the way to the European Humans Right court). Also Turkey has had a similar, more restrictive even, ban for much of century. Why is it everyone suddenly gets all distressed when France decides to follow suit. Calling Turkey Islam-phobic is kinda absurd.
Were it just an innocent piece of garment there’d be no problem, however the garment signals things no nine year old girl can (nor should) relate to in any meaningful way.
Certainly sage Spears is a moral pillar whose credentials are impeccable, but I must say I’ll not bend to an appeal to authority argument. I have heard of cases involving girls from the age of six (but am I correct in assuming you would look more favourable on a ban if we were talking of six year old girls? And if so what is your cut-off age?). Regardless, if I remember correctly, here (your local mileage may vary) the average age of first menstruation is 12.3 years or thereabouts. Now I don’t know how you define women but in my book 12 is not it. In any case, the average covers variations from 7-8 to 16-17 years (lately there has been some consternation because the low end is becoming more the norm and nobody seems to know why). These are no ages to be imposed adult sexuality, merciless segregated or (not talking scarves) severely restricted in your movements, vision and hearing. Also, while they may have free-choice on some abstract level removed from reality, expecting girls (children) of this age to put up any real opposition against parents, family and community is not really realistic (do they even have a legal right, when not of legal age?), especially considering the way the cards are massively stacked against her. (Don’t see how your example is relevant. It would be relevant if your mother decided to outfit your sister with miniskirts and the school said no-way. Actually some schools in Denmark have lately seen themselves forced to set up restrictive guidelines on clothes because some girls took to wearing too (according to them) sexy clothes in school. How is that different in substance? Chaperone the boys is kinda strange though, isn’t it?)
And this is where Europe and America part ways. While I agree in principle, I do not hold to the unfettered individualism you seem to advocate, especially when those choices have unfortunate consequence. Also you insist it’s a free choice, but I still can’t see how you can claim 7,8,9, etc. girls have any real freedom in such a matter. Perhaps the state infringes on the parents unrestricted rule over their children, hardly over the children’s private choice.
Well, I don’t know. The extremists perhaps, but they’re already unreachable. Meanwhile the majority will, after the whole thing settles a bit down, follow the rules without much ado. In any case this goes to the effectiveness of a ban, and not the moral right, which is another discussion from that we’ve been having here.
Did I forget to mention I’m the centre of the universe, all things measure?
Six, seven, … twelve. Well that certainly depends on what you mean by sexual maturity. If you mean physical able to conceive (if not bear children without complications) you are correct. If you mean physiological as well as mentally ready to be sexual active. Then 7-12 is nowhere close. For those who think 7-12 year old girls possess an irresistible sexual power that must be controlled by bulky, covering, restrictive clothes, well they’re sick and that’s that.
- Rune
No worries, I’m sure I read something that wasn’t there.
I’m ethnocentric. I’m proud to be European and consider European civilisation the best thing since sliced bread. If I see something in another culture or religion I severely dislike (as child abuse), I’ll not back off and write it off in a book titled cultural relativism.
I haven’t written it off as such a symbol - entirely and for all people. Mostly I’ve argued it, and especially the more restrictive robes and burkas, have no place on children, because for the majority (my judgment) it is oppression. Whether a ban is ineffectual or even counterproductive is of course something to consider. But ineffective rules is hardly something to get upset about. The right of the individual can be protected on many different levels. Some would say it is exactly protecting the individual to create a society wherein children are not forced to be miserable because someone finds them intolerantly sexual, whereas standing back would be considered to dodge responsibility. Whose individual rights should be protected when they clash, the child or the parents? The same arguments can be used against passing laws forbidding corporal punishment of children by their parents, and all other checks on parent’s unlimited rule.
No doubt the French system is biased. It’s biased against religion and for secularism. As an atheist I just don’t see what it is specifically about religious symbols you get so upset about. I have a daughter in school, and while it has not a ban on veils it does have a ban on symbols to do with football clubs, some gang markings, as well as some kind of restriction on revealing clothes I believe. What is it about religious symbols that get your blood boiling while leaving it unaffected by all the other restrictions? Some root for Jesus, some root for Allah and some root for Manchester United. Surely one is as good as the other for an atheist.
- Rune
I’m afraid you’re projecting your own fears and insecurities Dutchie. Perhaps psychotherapy can help you get past it?
Abraham! (no ethnocentrism here, he’s a VIP in both Judaism, Islam and Christianity) Dutchboy. Lay off the Marxist theory will you. I’m not denying anybody’s rightful share in any wealth. Merely point out there’s a reason Arabs and French alike prefer France and that France is rich while the middle-east by and large is poor, and that reason has a lot to do with the miserable position of women in the middle-east, a thing the scarf symbolizes quite adequately. It would be stupid for them to move to France and there again repeat all over again the same mistakes that made them move there in the first place. There is a version of Islam that does not need to merciless segregate, isolate and suppress women – which is a religion with many admirable traits much to be respected, and there is a version of Islam that takes pleasure in the misery of women – which is a religion that should, if you’d pardon my ethnocentrism, be flushed down the loo like yesterdays goldfish.
- Rune
Abraham on a pongo stick! I screwed up the quotes in that last one. All the quotes should be from dutchboy208, not Sine Normen. Sloppy me!
It’s best described as mesh.
For illustrative purposes, so that everyone is aware of what’s being discussed:
This is a woman in a hijab. Apparently, they are worn (in some instances) by little girls, though in all cases I’ve seen, young(er) girls wear light, solid-colored hijab rather than black or patterned ones favored by older women, like these two, this group or this girl. Those images seem exemplary of exactly what the French wish to ban from their schools. I should note that the photo of the group of little girls in hijab would seem to indicate that it is part of the required uniform of an Islamic school where they are students, (note that they and the girls in the background are all wearing similar tan dresses) and the little girl with glasses is probably also at an Islamic school, based on the website.
I fail to see where this represents a threat to anything, be it Frenchness, other students’ education, the price of tea in China or the chance of camels successfully launching a rocket to the moon.
If the issue is pushed and this law goes through, doesn’t it seem likely that there will be other Muslim (and Jewish) schools opened? Perhaps in short order? Or are there sufficient bureaucratic hurdles to opening private schools in France as to prevent this from happening?
Wow, presumptuous much? Do you know any young people who have been raised in religious homes, particularly religions which have standards of dress and modesty within their communities? These girls are, generally speaking, not nearly as concerned with temporal and frivolous things like fashion and “fitting in” outside of their community because they’ve got a built in support system which doesn’t put emphasis on such things and girls from outside their faith who are their friends aren’t likely to be the kind to exert pressure on them about those things.
What, someone under 18 is incapable of making any decision on their own? (Better call up the Catholics and have them cancel confirmations for 14 year olds, and immediately put a stop to all of those Bar and Bat mitvahs, too. Those 13 year olds are far too young to make such choices!) Family unity is unimportant in matters of faith, parents should go to services and leave the kids at home so as to not influence them? What fantasy land are you living in?