I first heard about the French government banning headscarves in
Professor Jafar's talk this past Saturday. I was appalled. But I was even more
appalled to hear that if women donned a burkha in public, they would be fined.
What I find hard to grasp is why people are so focused on forcing others to
assimilate into their culture? Why is the headscarf such a threat? I see it
simply as means of connecting to ones culture and a part of ones identity. But
from the article, it was clear that the debate hid much more than just a debate
and ban over a clothing article.
I was very interested to read, "In the eyes of the host
society, immigrant women are seen in one of two ways: as either "barriers
to assimilation" because of their insistence on maintaining cultural tradition
or, as the opposite, "vehicles of integration on dominant society".
The French largely ignore the "minority group" and instill the
pressure to conform, using schools as a means of this. The French were scared
to lose supremacy. French press portrayed the headscarf as a symbol of Islamic fundamentalism. People were fed images and feared that the Algerian Islamic Salvation Front was organizing in France. This brings to light the power of media and its use as a means of social control.
The French defended their banning of headscarves by claiming separation
of church in state. But in the article, it says that the schools made certain accommodations
for other religions. Students were not given exams on Saturdays to respect the
Jewish Sabbath and fish was served on Fridays to accommodate the Catholics.
Also, Jewish students were allowed to wear a yarmulke (Jewish skullcap) but
women were strictly banned from wearing a headscarf. Pretty unfair and unjust
if you ask me! Killian writes that the veil became a symbol that represents the
struggles over cultural boundaries and self-definition. The Muslim women argue that all people, including the children of immigrants, have the right to
express their religions and cultures. I was interested to read that many of
these women were personally against the veil. After reading the article, the
racism and hypocrisy of the French towards the Muslims really is apparent. By
refusing to discuss the Muslim religion and traditions like Ramadan, the French
keep their supremacy by keeping others ignorant about the Muslim religion. The headscarf is one easy way the French can keep its power. However, I believe, no one should have to give up his or her rights to cultural expression and the French are no exception.
Although I am not very knowledgable on the relationship between the French and the Muslim, it seems that they are living in the past if they keep up this demonizing of Muslims. France is extremely populated with Muslims and they need to accept this fact, and actually embrace the diversity they bring to the country, instead of remaining ignorant of the Muslim roots. As Josie poses the question, why is a head scarf such a threat? I started to think about it. Compared to giving a holiday off for Catholics, or celebrating Jewish holidays, the head scarf is a tangible object. Additionally, when you think about it, with a head scarf, only the eyes are left visible. While this can be alluring to some, to others, it's a threat. Thieves, and especially, robbers, have been socially constructed in our media to wear something that covers up their entire face, minus their nose and eyes. While I might be way off on this connection, it seems to me that this makes it easier for people to associate head scarves with danger and threat.
ReplyDeleteI was appalled at the lack of equality in the way religious expression is handled in French public schools. Making accommodations for Jews and Catholics but explicitly banning the religious expression of Muslim women? Ridiculous. Personally, as an atheist, I sometimes struggle with the idea of making accommodations for any religion when it gets in the way of what is equal and what is logical. If a test is naturally going to fall on a Saturday, should the school really postpone until the next school day because some students celebrate the Sabbath? Is this not holding the class back from continuing their learning? What if a group of non-Jewish students felt as strongly as Jewish students about something secular that conflicted with taking the test on a Saturday? Because it is not religious, would they still not have to take the test? I'd like to explore more sides of this discussion, as I can't help but feel at least slightly insensitive when posing these questions.
ReplyDeleteAs for headscarves, I do not believe they should be banned. The only case in which I could see a potentially valid argument for their banishment would be if the covering of the head compromises security. Other than that, they are articles of expression and the government should not be able to ban them specifically - especially for reasons that are not consistent with their take on other religious articles of expression.
Josephine, I really enjoyed your post and I agree with your claims. I too, think it’s unfair that accommodations were made for some religions practices but not all. It’s not fair the Jewish can wear their yarmulkes and the Muslim girls were banned from wearing their veils. The term integration seems so distant to me in relation to current day society. When I think of integration I think of when different ethnic and racial groups were first coming to America. There are still several immigrants coming to the US, but when it comes to religious preference, people are allowed to practice what they want. It’s one thing to stress the importance of learning a cultures language, but its completely different to want to strip people of their beliefs. I think it’s completely unfair, and only stands to enforce a country’s power over immigrant people.
ReplyDelete-Tina Seretta
We talked about the headscarf affair a little bit in high school and, if my memory serves me correctly, I think a big part of the government's decision to ban headscarves was because it found that many women were forced into wearing them by religious male family members. The government reasoned that it would provide women with more liberty and authority over their lives by prohibiting head scarves. Also, as Mike points out, I believe the government also took security factors into consideration; at times, husbands mandated that their wives wear headscarves to cover bruises that they had received from being beaten. I only mention these things to suggest that we might not know the whole picture here. France is fairly progressive and probably wouldn't pass legislation that compromised a person's liberty without careful consideration.
ReplyDelete-Ellie Merrell
Ellie I agree with you completely on the fact that we should never stop asking questions about this case so we are well informed on the problem at hand. I believe the media plays a huge role in broadcasting information that we may not know everything about and making immediate assumptions. However, if the veil is being forced to wear and to cover up bruises, we have an enormous problem that is highly difficult to solve and even talk about sometimes.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we are making progress, though, if we are allowing practicing Jews to wear yarmulkes because not to long ago Jews were definitely not an accepted community of peoples. Maybe we are slowing allowing assimilation for particular groups of people to be recognized as "white." Unfortunately, these changes will take time and will happen in a strategic manner, giving liberties to the seemingly 'less threatening' groups of people first and then trickling down the hierarchical ladder to struggling people who are marginalized on the outskirts of the harsh American society.
-Molly Bienstock