President Nicolas Sarkozy says that burqas are "not welcome" in France, and supports a ban on women wearing the burqa in public.
[He] said the Muslim burqa would not be welcome in France, calling the full-body religious gown a sign of the "debasement" of women.In the first presidential address to parliament in 136 years, Sarkozy faced critics who fear the burqa issue could stigmatize France's Muslims and said he supported banning the garment from being worn in public.
"In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity," Sarkozy said to extended applause at the Chateau of Versailles, southwest of Paris.
"The burqa is not a religious sign, it's a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement -- I want to say it solemnly," he said. "It will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic."
Banning the burqa doesn't further women's rights - it limits them. Now, obviously there's a difference in Islamic women's dress from the hijab to the burqa - but legally banning any of them erases all agency from Muslim women. (I'm especially wary of Sarkozy's comments and this potential ban given that France banned headscarves from public schools in 2004.)
If you're interested in hearing Muslim women talking about the hijab, here are a couple of interesting vids.
UPDATE: Jill has more.
Related posts: Only citizenship for some: France denies citizenship to Muslim woman
Malaysian women speak out on hijab
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Sarkozy supports burqa ban .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/14519
One of my coworkers put an interesting light on this (back when the headscarf controversy was happening). She's Albanian and grew up with liberal parents in a strict Muslim community.
Being my customary American self, I was upset that France had banned headscarves for the limitations it presented on religious expressions. She disagreed. Growing up, she said, the social pressure to cover her head was incredibly intense, beyond what we get in the US. If women and girls were left to 'decide' whether or not to wear the scarves, family and social pressures would almost inevitably make them don the attire, whether they wanted to or not. If one person chose to wear the headscarf, then everybody would eventually feel forced to wear it. She saw the ban as a great way to counteract these pressures.
And let's not forget that a headscarf isn't a burqa. to prepose that human beings choose this! This site jumped the shark today.
You might think it's preposterous that a woman would choose to wear a burka. But the woman in question might have a myriad of reasons why she wears the burka, none of which are yours or Sarkozy's business.
You might think she's oppressed. Au contraire, she might just be happy as a clam in her burka and be pretty pissed off that the State is telling her to take her clothes off.
As for the positive effect that your co-worker is talking about, I would argue that the opposite is far more common. Laws against clothing will further stigmatize and marginalize the women who wear them. And for the women who are forced to wear the burka against their will -- banning the burqa is, at best, a band-aid solution. Instead of being "liberated," they may find themselves unable to leave their homes.
Last I looked at a map, France ain't Albania...Somehow I don't think the same peer pressure applies there as in Albania. Hell, the same peer pressure doesn't even apply in Iran, where many women don't wear burqas.
The 1st Amendment makes a big difference, I'm glad we have it. This is just more immigrant bashing by Sarkozy--something he's experienced at. He hasn't met a brown/black immigrant he's liked.
Funny they don't ban crucifixes, yamulkes, or habits over there.
"Last I looked at a map, France ain't Albania...Somehow I don't think the same peer pressure applies there as in Albania. Hell, the same peer pressure doesn't even apply in Iran, where many women don't wear burqas."
...and where, according to my mom, some of the women who cover their hair and bodies in chadors (and very occasionally even cover their noses and mouths in niqabs) do bare their breasts in public. The idea seems to be that covering one's hair is modest and baring one's breast isn't immodest when one's baby is hungry.
Funny they don't ban crucifixes, yamulkes, or habits over there.
With the exception of habits, since you can't both be a nun and go to public school, all of these things have been banned in public schools. No religious articles in public schools, at all, in France.
I think the interesting thing about this comment is that, well, it's wrong. These articles are banned in certain parts of French society to maintain secularism. As a result, many French Muslims are actually going to Catholic school so they can wear religious articles all the time and express themselves and their culture.
While not exactly puzzle-pieced into what you're saying, I felt the need to point out that there are places where these things are banned in France because France has a history of secularizing for fear of having people be different. France wants to homogenize -- that's where France becomes racist/xenophobic.
Yeah but its not enforced wrt yamulkes & crucifixes...in fact they wrote the law in such a way as to allow all but the largest crucifixes...so, sure, the ban was meant to apply to all religions.
The law banned all "ostentatious" religious symbols, though it was largely understood to be targeted at Muslim women. Hence the name "headscarf law."
Funnily enough, the people most affected by the headscarf law were Sikhs, who had to remove their turbans.
The French tried to stick it to the Muslims, and got the Sikhs instead...oops.
Its offensive and frightening that we would let a State seize women's agency & decide FOR THEM how they can worship--or not. While its not insignificant that some men certainly force their wives & daughters into burqas, its FAR more offensive, and FAR more dangerous to let the State intrude into matters of conscience. Its far easier for a woman to leave her husband, or a daughter her father, than for a woman who just wants to practice her religion to leave her country. This way lies tyranny. Its not right when the Right does, and its not right when the Left follows suit.
In the US this would be the equivalent of forcing female rape victims to get abortions because the State just knows that no rape victim would want to give birth to such a child. This is just dressed up Western-centrism.
Regulating what women can wear in public is never good, no matter what, in my opinion. If they want to wear a burqa, no matter what their feelings and motivations are behind it, that's fine. if they want to wear skinny jeans and tube tops, that's fine. If they want to wear oversized t-shirts and sweat pants, that's fine.
It's their right.
And I think for women who feel that wearing a burqa is not negative, or even empowering for them, this law will cause them great distress and discomfort, and left feeling vulnerable.
This is NOT a good thing!
I understand why he did this, and that he has great intentions. But I don't know if this is the right way to go about this issue.
This. Forbidden an item of clothing takes the agency away from women just as much as forcing them to wear it does.
If the burqa is allowed, you will never, ever know if that woman is wearing it by choice or force.
I completely agree with Sarkozy, and hope the ban spreads so far and wide even Muslim countries are forced to adopt it, and Turkey successfully reinstates the ban on it.
It is meant to be a marker of class, and to set women apart from non-Muslim women precisely so they are treated different even by Muslims. It is degrading.
It doesn't hurt a woman to take a veil off of her face (she is allowed to keep one over her hair). It hurts many more woman who are being forced to and cannot take it off.
It isn't the root of the problem, true, but what an excellent place to start.
I was beginning to think I was the only feminist out there who agrees with this move. If I were French, I'm sure I'd feel the same way: I don't want the government telling people how to dress. However, I also want to curb patriarchy wherever I see it.
The burqa is not a religious symbol. It is a cultural tradition that has been used as a symbol of oppression. Many Muslim women have liberated themselves from the practice, but many men still force their wives and daughters to wear the burqa. Hijabs and headscarves, I have no problem with. But the burqa is not required by the Quran and should not be tolerated in any republican society.
You're not the only feminist, believe me. I feel naseous that Jessica would even make this post. Headscarves and hijabs are one thing, but to even pretend for one momen that the burqa is the same is stomach-turning.
In no way can a woman wearing a burqa ever be said to have "chosen" it. She is either physically intimidated into wearing it, or brainwashed from childhood into wearing it, or culturally pressured into wearing it.
I'm disgusted by this post on Feministing.
What's even more astounding is the replies to a similar post on Jezebel.
Another forum I frequent was discussing this, when I found myself arguing against an atheist Libertarian and a staunch conservative, both against the banning of the burqa. There were several other right-wing Christian posters who agree that banning the burqa is more oppressive than allowing men to force their wives to wear it. It's like the Twilight Zone.
I guess when religion gets involved, then you have the right wingers willing to defend just about anything, and when culture gets involved, then you have the left willing to defend just about anything.
I'm pretty left, but I don't feel any need to place the Muslim "culture" above the christian one which any one here would be the first to admit is fucked up about women. I'm not interested in kissing any man's ass no matter which religion he represents to show off my multicultural bonafides.
I remembered today why I rarely read this site. And I Am A Fucking Feminist.
I guess when religion gets involved, then you have the right wingers willing to defend just about anything, and when culture gets involved, then you have the left willing to defend just about anything.
I'm pretty left, but I don't feel any need to place the Muslim "culture" above the christian one which any one here would be the first to admit is fucked up about women. I'm not interested in kissing any man's ass no matter which religion he represents to show off my multicultural bonafides.
I remembered today why I rarely read this site. And I Am A Fucking Feminist.
"There were several other right-wing Christian posters who agree that banning the burqa is more oppressive than allowing men to force their wives to wear it. It's like the Twilight Zone."
WTF?
Obviously forcing someone to wear it is oppressive and forcing someone to not wear it is still oppressive but less so!
"In no way can a woman wearing a burqa ever be said to have "chosen" it. She is either physically intimidated into wearing it, or brainwashed from childhood into wearing it, or culturally pressured into wearing it."
Presumption, presumption, presumption. You accuse a woman of being brainwashed into wearing a burka when you have no idea why she might wear it!
Do you talk to these women yourself? I live in Paris and I see the consequence of the 2005 ban on religious symbols. I talk to Muslim women. Real women, with brains, that are (surprise!) extremely self-aware. They are even feminist (gasp! it's true! a Muslim feminist omg!)
(Caton) "In no way can a woman wearing a burqa ever be said to have "chosen" it. She is either physically intimidated into wearing it, or brainwashed from childhood into wearing it, or culturally pressured into wearing it."
CATON, Have you ever ASKED women who wear the burqa why they wear it and how they feel about it?
I live in Canada (born and raised in Quebec), and I WEAR THE NIQAB. And yes, I did CHOOSE to wear it. My parents and my family (even extended family) are not practising Muslims, and none of them wear the hijab, let alone the niqab, and one of my sisters is Christian. My parents have even asked me MANY times over not to wear it. They don't have a problem with hijab, but with niqab, yes.
I wear the niqab out of submission to GOD and not to any person or society.
As to your theory above of why a women wears the burqa (which is like the niqab, except the burqa has a mesh covering over the eyes),
1. I have obviously not been physically intimidated into wearing it since I have been asked by many who are close to me (especially my beloved parents) NOT to wear it,
2. Being born and raised in Quebec, and never having been to a religious school, or having any religious friends up until a few years ago (I am now 24), I obviously haven't been brainwashed into wearing. Then or now. I have friends who do not wear the veil, who wear the veil, and who wear the niqab. No one has ever even suggested to me that I should wear the niqab.
3. And culturally, of course not, since Quebec is obviously not culturally inclined to push women to wear the niqab.
And having MANY friends who do wear the niqab, I can tell you with confidence that NONE of them have been forced, quite the opposite...I know many who wear it while their family's do not and would rather them NOT wear it.
To force a woman who has chosen to wear the burqa, niqab or hijab, to REMOVE it, is like asking a woman who is not veiled to remove her clothes. You feel naked. Just as a woman who is not veiled believes that this is what she should wear, so does the woman who is veiled believes that this is what she should wear. I know this may be hard to understand, since I think I would have trouble understanding this similitude if I were not veiled, which I wasn't for the majority of my life. But that's why it's important that if you want to know why someone is doing something and how they feel a about it, you must ASK them...not CNN or any president.
I am not referring to women who have been forced to be veiled, this does happen but this is NOT the majority, especially in Western countries. You may think there's a large number of women who are forced, but that's because the media will show these stories, of course you're not likely to hear on the evening news about women who choose to wear the niqab. The news shows mostly distressing stories to the public.
-Sophie
thank you JesiDangerously. this bullshit is one of the things which really annoys me about so many feminists. while i dont believe in just banning without challening attitudes, this whole post-modernist push to support oppressive religious dogma (of all faiths) across the left is really annoying me. and they accuse me of siding with the far right over porn....
You want to curb patriarchy wherever you see it? Going to ban the bikini, miniskirt or corset next? After all, they're all about the male gaze and objectification, right? How about high heels? After all, they've even been proven to be dangerous to women's health!
The idea that if it's not banned, you don't know if it's by choice or by force may be true, but how far do you take this line of reasoning?
I'd rather err on the side of the woman being forced to, than the woman not being forced to, since the former is a victim, and the latter is not.
To the burqa.
Period.
Jessica attempting to conflate a burqa ban with the headscarf was what might have confused the issue for you, but if we are talking about burqas there is no slippery slope so "choice".
It's inhuman and for the same people who reconize and in fact lead the way in arguing that subordinates in the workplace may not have the choice to say no, to claim that a woman "chooses" to don the burqa in that oppressive culture is absurd, ludicrous and PC ass kissing at its worst.
Um, I actually specifically differentiated the hijab and burqa. But no matter the big differences between them, banning what women wear is NOT going to help women. (See SarahMC's comment.)
Who told you that France has to change THEIR culture and their morals to make religious extremists comfortable?
I think it will help women in the long run, but in the short run, no culture should have to change their own respect and empowerment of women and/or minorities to be pc, and that's what this is.
don't even try and pretend that wearing the burqa is a choice. You remind me of a NY Times story I read several years ago where a feminist at I believe it was Princeton, was asked why she was always criticizing her American classmates and professors, but wouldn't say a word about a member of the Taliban attending the school. She said it wasn't her place to criticize other cultures.
As if forcing and intimidating women into the burqa was a "culture". As if stoning women to death was a "culutre". But I'm sure she was a big hit on the campus just as I'm sure your pc take will be a big hit on the lecture circuit Jessica, but I have zero respect for you after this post. You have always annoyed the shit out of me for a variety of reasons but I have always said no matter where I was that I respected you and the work that you do.
that's gone after this. You've jumped the shark. Enjoy your academic accolades.
Who told you that France has to change THEIR culture and their morals to make religious extremists comfortable?
I must have missed the story about Muslim immigrants trying to force French women to wear burqas.
Who said France has to change any of their in-born cultural values to allow other cultures to exist in the Republic? Why can't there be cultural pluralism and still a functional nation?
As has been said here many times, when Sharia is lifted in a nation (like Afghanistan, where burqas are common), many women still do choose to wear a burqa. Some choose to wear a niqab. Others choose to wear just a headscarf.
Also, if you don't like it here this much, why did you come back?
" ... may not have the choice to say no, to claim that a woman "chooses" to don the burqa in that oppressive culture is absurd, ludicrous and PC ass kissing at its worst."
Very good point. Didn't we have a post just a few days ago that said we had a moral obligation to ban porn actresses from having sex without condoms, because even though women had a theoretical right to demand protection, there was pressure not to? Why are we so reluctant to infringe on a woman's self-determination when she's likely dominated by religious fundamentalists, when we're happy to make her choices for her when she's dominated by a profit-driven industry?
This section of the comments is appalling. I'm astounded by the arrogance of these claims.
[i]"It is meant to be a marker of class, and to set women apart from non-Muslim women precisely so they are treated different even by Muslims. It is degrading."[/i]
First, it is not up to you, nor any well-meaning feminist to determine what is degrading and what is not. Second, who are you to determine what the single, overarching meaning of the veil is? Are you an Islamic scholar? An anthropologist?
Or are you just forgetting that cultural symbols and cultural memes, such as the wearing of the veil, can have a wide variety of meanings, many of them having nothing at all to do with oppression?
[i]"It doesn't hurt a woman to take a veil off of her face (she is allowed to keep one over her hair). It hurts many more woman who are being forced to and cannot take it off."[/i]
Incredible presumption. Since when did you become Mistress of Authority to decide for a woman what hurts her and what doesn't? How do you know how many women are forced to wear the veil? How do you know how many women wear it freely? You have no idea.
Furthermore,you have no idea what would happen to a woman who lives in a family where she is forced to wear the veil. A ban against veils will not change any underlying assumptions among her family members. The veil is not the problem, the [b]male oppression[/b] is the problem.
And it may just stop her from leaving her home. Thanks to her "liberation."
Sorry for the above mess, my HTML tag skillz are lacking today. It's bedtime here in Paris :)
Well then we'll agree to disagree and hope the French parliament agrees with me.
"If the burqa is allowed, you will never, ever know if that woman is wearing it by choice or force."
Heck, if ankle-length trousers are allowed, how can you tell if a woman is wearing it by free choice or fear?
Personally, I actually like shorts and ankle-length trousers and shirts and dresses with hemlines of all lengths except mid-shin. However, thanks to my Iranian ancestry and my PCOS my leg hair is stubborn, my leg skin is sensitive, and my surroundings are hostile to women revealing hairy legs. Since my leg stubble takes a few hours to grow back and my razor burn takes a few weeks to heal, I very rarely wear short skirts or shorts instead of ankle-length trousers (or, less often, ankle-length skirts).
What if Massachusetts banned ankle-length trousers and ankle-length skirts, in the name of freeing people like me from pressure to wear them? That wouldn't stop the local culture's "hygiene" standards labelling bodies like mine dirty. It would just force me to expose my leg hair whenever I went out in public, and increase the odds of my being laid off from work, rejected at job interviews, ostracized when trying to make friends or flirt, etc.
In other words, such a ban would be back-asswards. What we need is to have the discrimination ended first, and then we can stop camouflaging ourselves to evade it.
If you change 'leg hair' to 'facial hair', you would have my predicament exactly. I am, in fact, quite envious of Muslim women for having these covering choices available to them (of course, I could do the same if I wished, but I feel it would be disrespectful to their faith, as I'm not Muslim).
Instead of the *hour or more* I need to spend on 'grooming' (shaving, makeup, etc.) to do something as simple as go to the corner store without being harassed for my physical differences, I think I would quite enjoy the 'freedom' of a niqab.
"If you change 'leg hair' to 'facial hair', you would have my predicament exactly..."
Actually, I only left my facial hair out of my comment since I don't wear clothing to cover it.
"...I am, in fact, quite envious of Muslim women for having these covering choices available to them (of course, I could do the same if I wished, but I feel it would be disrespectful to their faith, as I'm not Muslim)..."
In my case, I could do the same but I'm secular Muslim and I don't want to send the "I'm very observant!" message.
"...Instead of the *hour or more* I need to spend on 'grooming' (shaving, makeup, etc.)..."
It used to take me that long just for the plucking before the shaving (for the hairs thick enough to show through the topmost and nearly transparent layer of skin after shaving)!
Personally, it's down to about a half hour now because I was privileged enough to have parents who could afford laser hair removal and cut down that growth (it's not 100% effective, though) and skin light enough to reflect the laser (otherwise it's dangerous) and hair dark enough to absorb the laser (otherwise it doesn't work) but of course not everyone like us has those!
"...to do something as simple as go to the corner store without being harassed for my physical differences, I think I would quite enjoy the 'freedom' of a niqab."
Good points! In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that's part of why these customs were invented in the Middle East centuries before Islam and millennia before laser hair removal. Having most of the people in a culture pass on a trait is no guarantee the culture will accept the trait (and it's not just us either)...
"If the burqa is allowed, you will never, ever know if that woman is wearing it by choice or force."
And if it its banned BY THE STATE you'll know this...how??? This is nothing but LAZY thinking. If its banned you'll never even have the opportunity to find out if women want the ban. The woman has a better chance of standing up to her husband or father than she does of standing up to the state.
I've thought long and hard about this issue. Banning a religious symbol in the United States would be a clear first amendment/free-exercise violation, but in France, secularity is a pillar of the republic, so it's not so clear on the legal grounds.
On the moral grounds, I've been strongly in favor of liberty and freedom of conscience, but I'm not an absolutist. Unlike some hard-core libertarians who think that you should be able to voluntarily enter into slavery or sell your organs for profit, I think that we are better off with less than total freedom.
In the case of the burqa, I think it isolates the community, and makes it harder for muslim women to access the full possibilities of French life. The nub of the matter is that fundamentalism is a Bad Thing, and I can't help but notice that in Iran, where women tend to wear a headscarf that only covers the back of their hair, women earn more than 50% of college degrees, whereas in Afghanistan, where they wear the burqa, girls are not allowed to attend elementary school.
So, I think that banning the burqa is an experiment worth trying in France, but I'm open to hearing different opinions on this.
This is a great post on headscarf in Iran:
http://muslimahmediawatch.org/2009/06/19/you-say-you-want-a-revolution-in-a-loose-headscarf/
I really encourage you to read it.
Also, as far as the comparison between Iran and Afghanistan..there are clearly A LOT more factors at play that go into rates of education/illiteracy....politics, economics, etc..
Correlation does not imply causation. What about all of the muslim women that wear hijab and excel academically. Can we then say that a hijab is a prerequisite to excelling academically?
The issue here is about choice. You are controlling a woman's body just as much by telling her she cant wear something as you are by telling her that she has to wear something.
The hijab and the burqa are not the same thing. The burqa is worn to completely conceal a woman's body, and the Quran does not call for that extreme form of "modesty". It is a tradition created by men to oppress women.
The hijab is a more appropriate religious garment, as it adequately covers the female form without trying to pretend that the female form does not exist.
The few women who willingly choose to wear the burqa without pressure from any male in her life do so on a false premise of what the Quran requires a woman to wear.
I definitely do not want to conflate the hijab with the burqa. I was merely using it as an example to address the point that "correlation does not imply causation."
The burqa is not obligatory in Islam. Personally, as a muslim woman, I dont like the burqa. I would even go so far as to say that I hate it. However, I do think that this issue goes a lot deeper than what i may or may not like and what you may or may not like.
Also, I do not completely agree with your statement that "The few women who willingly choose to wear the burqa without pressure from any male in her life do so on a false premise of what the Quran requires a woman to wear." I think generalizations of any kind are dangerous and dehumanizing. I know people that definitely do not fall into this category. They wear the burqa, knowing that its not obligatory but do so because they think its going a little "extra". Again, I dont agree with that but I think it should be noted that that is a particular viewpoint.
Yes. And yet, everyone who wants to claim that outlawing the burqa is "controlling women" wants to continue to conflate the burqa with the hijab and the headscarf.
They are making a dishonest argument.
But Jessica began that.
I don't think you get it.
You can know the difference between the two and still object; the argument I would give, along with others here, is that you cannot compell change in this area by legislative fiat, without losing other important freedoms.
"The few women who willingly choose to wear the burqa without pressure from any male in her life do so on a false premise of what the Quran requires a woman to wear."
Either that or not on a false premise but for some other probably-more-mundane reason, right?
I cannot agree with this measure. I will agree that in some circles there in a degree of compulsion - which is wrong - but, this is not the way to go about it.
Firstly, it gives the green light for racists to attack (verbally or otherwise) Muslims - in this case particularly Muslim women. Fascist Le Pen came second in French elections in recent years. A measure like this is not good at any time, but, in the current climate, is dangerous. Any intolerance that already exists will breed.
Secondly, (I speak as an atheist when I say this) while it is correct that religion and state should be entirely separate, freedom of expression - including religious expression - should be a right.
I am staggered.
I am staggered to see the burqa defended on a site that considers high heels to be oppressive.
Come on! Let's be realistic here. A western woman who chooses to wear high heels or become a cheerleader can decide to wear low heels and a heavy sweater the next day.
I am extremely suspicious when I hear the statement about the burqa being worn freely - I feel like retorting 'the day that woman is seen in a t-shirt or unveiled I will believe that her burqa was a free choice - until then I don't believe that she is free to do otherwise.'
I think the issue with those against the ban is more along the lines of being fearful of the type of precedent being set when a government authorizes bans on religious symbols, and specifically what women can and cannot wear.
It is because there is no consensus on what it symbolizes (here in the West) and why it is worn, that there is so much defense of the burqa.
But in the countries in which the burqa is enforced, there is only one main reason: women should not show their skin in public, because of their inherent "sinfulness".
I'd like to point out that a woman who would original wear a burqa wouldn't wear a t-shirt because it violates Islamic codes of modesty. It's rather culturally insensitive to set up this "test" for women who don't believe they should be wearing those types of clothing because it would be in violation of God's Law.
It's like saying you will think Mormon or Orthodox Jewish women will only be liberated when they can wear mini-skirts of her religion's appropriately sanctioned clothing.
That comment is privilege.
"I'd like to point out that a woman who would original wear a burqa wouldn't wear a t-shirt because it violates Islamic codes of modesty."
Are you sure?
Today I saw a woman wearing hijab and a short-sleeved blouse (and baring most of her arms, unlike the t-shirt-over-turtleneck style I sometimes saw in high school), and she wasn't the first woman I've seen in person doing that either. I've also seen the hijab-and-t-shirt combo in news photos out of Indonesia.
Meanwhile, my mom says that in Iran when she was a girl some women wore chadors in the morning and covered up less in the afternoon. The idea there was "Do I want to wait until I get spruced up and dressed up before I get my newspaper hot off the press and my pastries hot out of the oven? Nah, I'll just throw on a chador, go to the newsstand and the bakery, come home, have breakfast, take a shower..."
So, the same woman wearing burqa and a t-shirt, without changing her beliefs before changing clothes, isn't so far-fetched either.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that no women who wear burqas do so of their own free will. What effect will banning the burqa have on those women? Will they be liberated from patriarchal oppression or will the patriarchal oppression take another form? I imagine women will simply be forced to stay home rather than move around in public without the burqa.
You can't destroy male oppression of women by limiting women's clothing options.
Not that any of this is truly about empowering women.
Then the men will be sent to prison for slavery.
But more importantly, they'll never be able to force their daughters to wear it once they reach the proper age: once they get their periods and become "marryable".
So who gets punished if women break the no-burqa law? The woman herself, who may have been forced to wear it, or her male guardian? And what makes you think men would be arrested for "slavery" if their wives/daughters/whatever never left the house?
Good question. I do not know what the fines/penalties are for wearing the cross or yarmulke (for example) in France in their schools/public buildings, but I assume it would be the same.
And why wouldn't they be arrested for slavery?
Maybe you mean unlawful imprisonment rather than slavery? I don't know why they shouldn't, but who is going to report them? I don't see it happening, logistically. It seems like there's a lot of pressure being put on Muslim women here - making them responsible for ending male oppression.
"I'm guessing the difference people see between them is that for one your whole body including your eyes are covered making the woman unrecognizable. Because of this, it seems to take away a woman's identity especially in public."
Speaking of identity, not everyone prefers to wear her or his identity on her or his sleeve. What about people who like concealing some of their identity, and maybe even like being a bit more sneaky than average?
Then the men will be sent to prison for slavery.
But more importantly, they'll never be able to force their daughters to wear it once they reach the proper age: once they get their periods and become "marryable".
?? huh? First of all, women unable to leave their home because of legal restrictions on their religious beliefs is not "slavery". And the men won't get sent to prison for anything.
And I am not sure where you get this point either
"But more importantly, they'll never be able to force their daughters to wear it once they reach the proper age: once they get their periods and become 'marryable'."
A) Parents can still force their daughters to wear hijabs, and they just won't let them out of the house since they will not be dressed "properly". B) what is this about daughters getting their periods? Parents are the legal guardians of their children til theyre 18- the parents will simply chose to never allow their children out of the house, which is totally legal, btw. They'll homeschool them. How is that a good solution? Children never even leaving the house!?
We need to provide opportunities for muslim women so they are empowered, not take away their choices and obstruct their unobtrusive religious practices.
Thanks for posting this. I disagree with the idea of a ban. Whatever we may feel about the burqa, its history and meaning, the fact is that many women do wear it out of choice. Women living in Iran do not have a choice nad have to wear the hijab so are in a different position. If women's choice is taken away then it is a violation of their rights. A total ban on the burqa would just be an alternative form of oppression.
Whilst I am aware that the burqa and hijab are different, as Jessica says, the hijab has been banned in French schools since 2004. The government used the dame reasoning then that they are using now: the hijab and burqa do not fit in with the republic's secular values. I find this very strange as liberty is central to these values and religious freedom is a constitutional right.
I am worried that if we take the route of judging all women who wear the hijab or burqa as oppressed then this only serves to stereotype Muslim women. Muslim women are individuals with differing views and opinions that we need to listen to and try to understand whether we agree with them or not. Otherwise we risk being oppressors.
Whoops... have accidently posted this over and over :-( Haven't posted here before and kept getting an error message!
Thanks for posting this. I disagree with the idea of a ban. Whatever we may feel about the burqa, its history and meaning, the fact is that many women do wear it out of choice. Women living in Iran do not have a choice nad have to wear the hijab so are in a different position. If women's choice is taken away then it is a violation of their rights. A total ban on the burqa would just be an alternative form of oppression.
Whilst I am aware that the burqa and hijab are different, as Jessica says, the hijab has been banned in French schools since 2004. The government used the dame reasoning then that they are using now: the hijab and burqa do not fit in with the republic's secular values. I find this very strange as liberty is central to these values and religious freedom is a constitutional right.
I am worried that if we take the route of judging all women who wear the hijab or burqa as oppressed then this only serves to stereotype Muslim women. Muslim women are individuals with differing views and opinions that we need to listen to and try to understand whether we agree with them or not. Otherwise we risk being oppressors.
Thanks for posting this. I disagree with the idea of a ban. Whatever we may feel about the burqa, its history and meaning, the fact is that many women do wear it out of choice. Women living in Iran do not have a choice nad have to wear the hijab so are in a different position. If women's choice is taken away then it is a violation of their rights. A total ban on the burqa would just be an alternative form of oppression.
Whilst I am aware that the burqa and hijab are different, as Jessica says, the hijab has been banned in French schools since 2004. The government used the dame reasoning then that they are using now: the hijab and burqa do not fit in with the republic's secular values. I find this very strange as liberty is central to these values and religious freedom is a constitutional right.
I am worried that if we take the route of judging all women who wear the hijab or burqa as oppressed then this only serves to stereotype Muslim women. Muslim women are individuals with differing views and opinions that we need to listen to and try to understand whether we agree with them or not. Otherwise we risk being oppressors.
Thanks for posting this. I disagree with the idea of a ban. Whatever we may feel about the burqa, its history and meaning, the fact is that many women do wear it out of choice. Women living in Iran do not have a choice nad have to wear the hijab so are in a different position. If women's choice is taken away then it is a violation of their rights. A total ban on the burqa would just be an alternative form of oppression.
Whilst I am aware that the burqa and hijab are different, as Jessica says, the hijab has been banned in French schools since 2004. The government used the dame reasoning then that they are using now: the hijab and burqa do not fit in with the republic's secular values. I find this very strange as liberty is central to these values and religious freedom is a constitutional right.
I am worried that if we take the route of judging all women who wear the hijab or burqa as oppressed then this only serves to stereotype Muslim women. Muslim women are individuals with differing views and opinions that we need to listen to and try to understand whether we agree with them or not. Otherwise we risk being oppressors.
Funny story - my grandmother commented a while ago about how some of the workers in her senior's home wore headscarves (not at all the same thing as a burqa, of course), and wondered if it wasn't very hot in the summer. But, after my great grandmothers came over from Russia, they wore headscarves almost their entire married lives. Ironic, but maybe since my grandmother adopted the "English" style, she's concerned about others who haven't done the same.
Great. Another man dictating how women should dress in public.
It is frankly quite presumptuous to assume that women who wear the burka are necessarily "oppressed." It is also a far-fetched claim that the burka, a mere article of clothing, is by its nature "oppressive."
It is really not up to you or me to determine whether a woman who wears a burka is oppressed or not. It is up to the woman wearing the burka.
Forcing a woman to take off her burka can be just as oppressive as forcing her to put it on.
If anyone wants to start a progressive Muslim movement, it should be an actual Muslim. Not Sarkozy..
Even if we assume that women who wear a burka in public are forced to do so - isn't this something like a ban on unexplained bruises in an effort to prevent domestic abuse? Surely, if the family has so much control over what a woman wears in public, they would simply keep her from going out in public?
I agree that it should be illegal to force someone to wear an unnecessary outfit which is often seen as a symbol of oppression, but shouldn't forcing people to wear it be banned, rather than the outfit itself?
If a woman genuinely feels that this is the only way to be properly modest, who are we to say that she has been "brainwashed by culture?" Imagine if France (or any nation) passed a law saying all women had to go topless whenever it was warm enough. That would conflict with most people's ideas of modesty, is it only because we have also been "brainwashed?"
"Even if we assume that women who wear a burka in public are forced to do so - isn't this something like a ban on unexplained bruises in an effort to prevent domestic abuse? Surely, if the family has so much control over what a woman wears in public, they would simply keep her from going out in public?
"I agree that it should be illegal to force someone to wear an unnecessary outfit which is often seen as a symbol of oppression, but shouldn't forcing people to wear it be banned, rather than the outfit itself?"
Exactly!
[[ HEADSPLOSION ]]
1. WTF is up with people saying "no woman has ever chosen to wear a burqa" -- you know THIS? You don't. Seriously.
2. I'm really upset by the way people say that the headscarf is okay and the burqa not -- why? Because you, as presumably Westerners, say so? So you should have MORE say so that the women whose bods it goes on?
3. I can't even wrap my head around the people who say, "As long as burqas are legal, some women will be forced to wear them." Probably, some will. But as long as they are banned, more women will BE LEGALLY UNABLE TO wear them if they choose. WHich is more oppressive? COME ON.
4. Why-oh-why do people think that it's they're duty to define symbols of oppression for other women? Muslim women aren't voiceless, and they don't need non-Muslims to speak for them, whether it be through ideology or law.
5. Just because something has patriarchal roots and exists in a patriarchal culture doesn't mean women can't value it as a part of their identity, their faith, their culture, and the way they experience their own personal embodiment. Have you taken a look at the American wardrobe? (Says I, American gurl.)
6. This is just nasty: a white, non-Muslim, patriarchal system singling out and targeting the physicality, identity, and choices of Muslim women; a native, predominately Anglo system singling out Muslim women and thus enforcing an "our way or no way" approach to their culture. An Othering of Muslim women for the sake of -- ??
Legally banning = inexcusable.
1. I did know someone who didn't choose to wear the headscarf but later chose to wear the niqab (which shows the eyes) so it is conceivable that someone would choose to wear the burqa. I can see why people find it hard to imagine though, which leads me to your second point.
2. I'm guessing the difference people see between them is that for one your whole body including your eyes are covered making the woman unrecognizable. Because of this, it seems to take away a woman's identity especially in public. Now, I'm not saying that makes it okay for the burqa to be banned but that seems to be why people would think burqas aren't "okay". I personally am uncomfortable when I can't see any part of a person's face (this includes certain Halloween costumes too) but we I agree with people that we can't make laws based on discomfort. There are a lot of things that a majority of people are uncomfortable with.
Still, no matter what I said above I don't support banning because I support laws that try to get to the root of problems and laws that focus on the person who is actually doing the hurting or controling. Is wearing a burqa actually hurting anyone? Some people might be tempted to say it's hurting the woman wearing it but are you okay with seeing her punished if she goes out with one on? This reminds me of sex work. It's the sex worker who often gets hurt and yet in the States it's often the sex worker who goes to jail.
"I'm guessing the difference people see between them is that for one your whole body including your eyes are covered making the woman unrecognizable. Because of this, it seems to take away a woman's identity especially in public."
Speaking of identity, not everyone prefers to wear her or his identity on her or his sleeve. What about people who like concealing some of their identity, and maybe even like being a bit more sneaky than average?
Your comment's a little vague. Are you thinking of anyone other than someone wearing a burqa? Just wondering. I do believe people should have the right to dress how they want. I believe in a secular government that allows freedom of religion so that the government to the best of their ability neither encourages nor discourages any religion. They should stay out of religion as much as possible.
"Your comment's a little vague. Are you thinking of anyone other than someone wearing a burqa?"
I was thinking of how some people (including me!) choose clothing for reasons other than self-expression, and that probably also includes some of the people who choose burqa.
I see though I wasn't even thinking of identity through self-expression. People in uniform can still be identified. I was simply thinking of being able to recognize a friend or acquaintance you randomly see on the street or on campus for example.
I would think that wearing a burqa emphasizes your identity (religious and cultural at the least) much more than not wearing one. Your comment is a bit contradictory.
-anin
WORD about #1.
Well, for all those people who think that a woman can't possibly choose to wear a burqa, all you need is one woman who chose it to prove you wrong! And I know a few who have chosen to wear niqaab, and read arguments from Muslim women about wearing the burqa.
I have studied Islam for years, and many women take the Qur'anic verses and the ahadith about a woman's dress very seriously. Many women quote different scholars and there are many different interpretations about what 'jalabib' is referring to, etc. etc. Some Muslims are very conservative about this and really do not wish to reveal themselves to men that are not of their immediate family. And the burqa is the extreme of it, but to state that a woman would never freely choose some of these things is, in my opinion, to underestimate how many people literally interpret religion. And that is THEIR CHOICE.
Negating all of that, I see no sense in really banning it. As others have said, what does this address? It addresses how 'good' and free France looks on the streets, but it does NOT and WILL NOT really address women's status in their homes, whatever they may be.
"a native, predominately Anglo system singling out Muslim women and thus enforcing an 'our way or no way' approach to their culture."
Nitpick: Franco, not Anglo!
Also, speaking of French culture and the hijab ban, see Muslim girl shaves head over ban, BBC News, Friday, 1 October, 2004, 17:20 GMT 18:20 UK:
"A 15-year-old French Muslim girl has beaten the ban on Islamic headscarves in schools by shaving her head.
"Cennet Doganay was banned from classes for wearing a headscarf - as it went against the new law banning religious signs in schools, introduced this term...
"...Her mother said Cennet had tried everything 'a beret, a bandana - but they still refused to let her into class'.
"She has been traumatised since the start of term. But all she wanted to do was go to school like everyone else," she told French news agency AFP.
"Reports say about 120 schoolgirls across France insisted on keeping their headscarves at the start of term, but most have since given in under threat of expulsion."
Yes, the school even banned a beret supposedly in the name of the French state...
Just a small thing, the French pride themselves on not being English. Anyone who's not French is an "Anglo", so calling the French "Anglo" is inherently insulting to the culture.
Other than that, TOTALLY ON BOARD OMG THANK YOU
Also, Sarkozy doesn't give a flying flark about women's equality.
This issue is a red herring.
Let me say that if I had spent a longer time in Morocco last summer for study abroad, I may have very well chosen to wear a hijab. I believe it would have definitely influenced a lot of my interactions with natives in the street... and maybe some positive things would have come from it. Hmmm.... I don't know.... less cat calls in the streets, less vendors thinking "oooh, American, let's rip her off," more friendly taxi service... Some people may claim that if I had done so, I wouldn't have CHOSEN the hijab, just forced into it by the culture.
I propose to you that each and every one of us is influenced by (our own) culture in almost everything we do, down to clothing choice. Could one argue that clothing of all types is oppressive on a hot summer day? Why don't we take it all off and go nude? Why? Because our culture (read parents, mentors, society's leaders) says it is inappropriate to go around without clothes. Would we willingly do so even if we didn't think about the over-arching society? No, probably not because, according to our internal cues ("American" cues?) say that we feel too exposed. That's ridiculous to blame that one on brainwashing from when we were children.
For those who think the burqa erases the identity, no it doesn't. Go a TALK with a women you find in the grocery store or on the street (well, actually more recommended for females to approach). You may actually find that her favorite color is purple, she likes the Mets, or that she chooses to wear the burqa because in her opinion she finds it oppressive that women in western cultures who wear skimpy outfits may do so to seek men's approval. So point is, don't assume any expression of religion means one thing by looking at it through the context of your own culture.
But we won't get to know that nice lady's beautiful personality if she decides to stay home because the state feels free to regulate her clothing...
i read through half the comments and couldnt even stomach most of them.
as a muslim woman who wore hijab for four years and then decided to stop, i am absolutely sick and tired of people telling me what to do with my body, how to cover it, how to UNcover it. from muslims AND non-muslims alike. muslim women are being attacked from all angles...and i wouldnt expect it here but...sigh
i know many women growing up who took pride in wearing the burqa. holding on to their values and ideals in a place that so badly wanted them in bikinis. that wasn't what they were comfortable in. and i took pride in wearing hijab as well - kind of a like a big fuck you to everyone who already thought of me as the weird nerdy brown girl in white suburbia. and when my mom started wearing hijab, her self-esteem flourished. it would kill her if she was ever forced to take it off. i actually think she wouldnt leave the house (and no, its not because my dad is a tyrannical oppressive terrorist...its because my mom would feel like she was naked.)
the funny thing is, so many muslim women i know laugh at the way that they are treated (my mother included) as if we are all so oppressed. its so paternalistic. when really, so many times i have heard these same women talking about how they think women in the united states are the poor, oppressed ones! because "oh, they are forced to go around half-naked"...i dont necessarily agree with it but my point is that it's another perspective.
obviously, women shouldnt be forced to do anything by their families or communities. and they shouldnt be forced to do anything by their governments either. for muslim women this is especially relevant because our bodies are always contentious. but we aren't poor little weak things like so many people in the united states think we are. sure there are women who are forced to wear burqas but if the govt bans them, it isn't going to break down patriarchy - its just going to continue a cycle of control over women.
we are fucking sick of being controlled.
This is a lovely comment. Thank you for posting it in the face of so much ideological hatred and Orientalist dehumanization on this thread.
As a (non-Muslim) woman who practices modest dress for reasons of faith, I am shocked by the unwillingness of many here to try to understand this from the perspective of a Muslim woman who would feel naked without the covering of her choice. (Were I forced to, say, wear clothing that left my legs uncovered, I would no more leave the house than your mother would without her hijab.) That so many commentators can state that they would like the government to force women to publicly undress makes me lose hope.
I'm really glad I'm not the only one who's been shocked by some of the comments on this thread. I'm not usually one to accuse people of ignorance, but in this case it's quite staggering and really rather upsetting. I'd have hoped for better from feministing commenters, though it is true that in the west these attitudes are so prevalent that even feminists aren't questioning them.
Whatever our personal feelings about the burqa the whole issue of "veiling" is really quite complex and tied up with a whole bunch of cultural, religious and political issues.
It's so frustrating that apparently a large proportion of western feminists are so blinkered as to be unable to see what limited assumptions they are making about this issue.
Note that we are not discussing the proper clothes for men here at all. We are discussing how women should dress, and that's because both religions and societies dictate this much more to women than to men. So I sympathize with fatima's feelings of being fucking tired over it.
"Note that we are not discussing the proper clothes for men here at all. We are discussing how women should dress, and that's because both religions and societies dictate this much more to women than to men. So I sympathize with fatima's feelings of being fucking tired over it."
Me three.
I agree that banning the burqa in France altogether is ridiculous - a better solution would be to create legal protection and rights for women who want to file complaints against someone who is forcing them to wear it.
I don't agree with conflating the national burqa ban to the ban in public schools at all. While I'm sure many racist teachers and school officials abuse the law to target only hajib-wearing students (and they should be called out on it), the law specifically bans ALL religious attire and symbols, something I agree with completely in a school setting. Public schools, unlike the public sector, are not for absolute free expression of religion. If they were, kids could wear T-Shirts saying, "God hates fags," "I hate Palestine," "I hate Israel," "The non-believers shall be tossed into lakes of fire," etc., etc. the way adults sometimes do in public.
With the burqa already banned in French schools, hopefully that alone encourages young women to question why they would want to wear it outside of school. If they freely decide they still want it, then yes, that is their right in public. If someone is forcing them, as I said before, there needs to be somewhere they can go to appeal it.
Hmm.
If wearing the burqa was really a completely free choice, then you would expect to see a normal distribution of people globally (in all cultures) who choose to wear it. This is not the case, so you can assume that the 'choice' is at least partly dictated by culture. In essence, you either choose to conform to what your religion/family/culture expect, or not. The first choice is always the best for an easy life. The latter choice may have bad consequences ranging from parental disapproval to being physically assaulted or even arrested in some extreme cases. So can we really blame a woman for 'choosing' what will get her the most approval?
She might also agree with the theory behind it (religious in nature) but then she has more than likely only been presented one viewpoint on the matter. It is very hard to overturn religious conditioning and education in your own mind, let alone translate it into behaviour, when you never hear the opposing side of the argument presented fairly (Western ways of dressing often get criticised by Muslims as immodest and shameful).
Only when we live in a truly secular society can people actually be free to choose what they wear. To all those people who say that the burqa is nothing to do with religion, sorry but it is. There are passages in the Koran that instruct a woman not to show off her beauty, and this is easily interpreted to mean that she shouldn't show her body or face at all. The ideal of women's 'modesty' is prevalent in all religions to a certain extent and it is this that we should be fighting against as feminists. The religious idea that women excite men through their very presence and that god therefore wants women to be controlled (not men, oh no!) lest all kinds of evil, wicked sex ensue - well this is an idea that should be openly criticised, and it is not racist to criticise it any more than it is 'man-hating' to be a feminist.
As for Sarkozy's proposed ban - I applaud the sentiment but I think practically, it will only serve to either a) make women feel like they have to stay at home, or worse, b) make men feel like they have 'no choice' but to force women and girls to stay at home to 'protect their modesty' etc.
Part of the solution must be that the religion itself (actually ALL religions), and its ideas about 'modesty' etc, is criticised openly, and for this, integration and secular education are key.
I am in no way favour of any culture which:
- Makes unequal demands regarding the 'modesty' of dress for men and for women.
- Regards women's bodies as something which should not be seen in public
- Forces women to wear anything they are not comfortable with.
Now, for me, as a Western woman, wearing the burqa would fall under all three of those points.
I believe that even for a woman who prefers to wear the burqa than not, it still falls under the first two.
So, I'd rather women did not wear the burqa - because I don't like what it implies about the culture they live in.
HOWEVER - this is NOT an issue which should be decided by law. As a French minister said on our news last night, he is against the subjugation of women and generally dislikes the burqa but he will fight Sarko on the legislation front. This is a battle that needs to be fought through education, outreach and support networks, not through legal bullying.
What culture do you favour, then? I don't know any culture that doesn't make unequal demands regarding men and women's clothing.
And what about the cultural implications of Western clothing?
"I believe that even for a woman who prefers to wear the burqa than not, it still falls under the first two."
Frankly, who cares? Why is your outsider perspective more important than hers? It's not. And it's just insulting that women want to decide what other women's clothing means.
The cultural implications of Western clothing also bother me. It bothers me just as much to see a woman wearing, say, something that suggests to me personally that she considers it necessary to make herself a sexual object in order to have a good night out. It bothers me that men can go topless without causing uproar and women can't. But this is all my own personal interpretation... and at the end of the day the only person whose dress I can dictate should be MINE. That's why I'm against enforced dress codes. If women (and men) are fully informed and as free as they can possibly be to make choices without fearing retribution for those choices then whatever they feel happy wearing is fine by me.
That's why this proposed law is so awful: it claims to be about freeing women from subjugation to repressive dress codes by.... forcing them to submit to Western codes of dress? Hmm, Sarko. Logic fail there.
And that's just it, right? I can see how, to use a tired example, high heels can be considered patriarchal and oppressive. They inhibit a woman's ability to walk, they were created in order to enahnce the female form by making her boobs and butt stick out more, etc. I can't really argue that they do anything good for women.
But I wear them sometimes because I want to, and it would be stupid for someone else to tell me that I shouldn't be able to because of what they symbolize or because women feel pressured to wear them.
NOTE: I am NOT trying to compare high heels and burqas, so no need to go down that road. I'm just using a non-burqa example of clothing to prove my point. Nothing makes me more angry than when people try to compare cross-cultural objects, such as people comparing foot-binding to high-heels (inappropriate and silly on many levels).
I don't know any culture that doesn't make unequal demands regarding men and women's clothing.
Really? I think you're just not looking hard enough then, lol. Because there are plenty of cultures that do not and did not impose modesty nor other unequal demands based on gender to anywhere near the degree that we see today. There are plenty of cultures, which existed without discord with regard to the issue of topless women. A clue is to look to indigenous cultures where the climate is at either extreme (very warm or extremely cold) and you should find plenty more examples.
Even cultures that did have elaborate rituals of dress, this was usually imposed on the upper class--so really, we're talking about very few people in the scheme of life on the planet. Until today, that is.
I'll never forget a picture in a text book from long ago, burned into my memory: It was essentially a woman of European ancestry sunbathing topless on an African beach (sorry don't know which country). In the distance we see some local women mostly covered up strolling along carrying some baskets on their heads as is customary in some cultures.
The sick thing is though when you think about it, is colonial fanaticism long ago implored the local women to cover themselves up: colonizers imposed their idea of modesty on people who had long managed fine without it. Flash forward to the photo and we see a flip-flop where European folk generally consider being uncovered a form of liberation. Well make up your mind already! What a mess!
"The sick thing is though when you think about it, is colonial fanaticism long ago implored the local women to cover themselves up: colonizers imposed their idea of modesty on people who had long managed fine without it. Flash forward to the photo and we see a flip-flop where European folk generally consider being uncovered a form of liberation. Well make up your mind already! What a mess!"
This actually reminds me of when a guy complains "You say you weant a nice guy but that other woman over there dates a jerk, make up your mind!"
i agree with you that it's insulting that some women want to decide what other women's clothing choices mean.
however, on this site, i've seen women who choose to shave their legs, or wear makeup, or high heels, or dress their daughters in pink, or what have you, told that those clothing choices enable the patriarchy, or that those are "unfeminist choices". when those commenters reply with their reasons, whatever they may be, it's often dismissed as "i choose my choice!" feminism.
i'm seeing a lack of consistency in the overall reaction to these issues (not yours specifically, tara k.), and i think it's important to get to the crux of why.
Burka, as a whole, does not depict a very 'agreed-upon' Islamic dress. Scarves, however, are quite a compulsion in Islam.
http://proamericanmuslims.wordpress.com/2009/06/23/ban-on-burka-in-france/
Like this move is going to solve anything. Now, if France were to pass a law making it illegal to brainwash your children into your bullshit beliefs, no one would be forced or pressured to wear burqas. I think it would be a pretty safe bet that they would become obsolete there (unless someone was a masochist or really self-conscious). Too bad it's never going to happen.
Tell me, do you consider all religions "bullshit beliefs", or just Islam? Are you seriously advocating for no freedom of religion?
I consider all religions bullshit, along with beliefs with psychics, the reptoids, Bigfoot and the like. However, let's concentrate on religion for now. How ironic you should use the phrase "freedom of religion". How can a small child being brainwashed by his/her nutty parents be in any way construed to practice religion freely? Or do children not have any rights in your opinion? Are they just property of whoever's crotch they happened to come from? In the U.S. even parents whose children are removed get to determine their religious affiliation. It's laughable. If there were true freedom of religion in society, it would be illegal to force religion on anyone, including children. How many women do you think we would then see wearing burqas and following some child molester's instructions on everything down to how to wipe their asses? Or believing in cosmic zombies, talking snakes and virgin births, for that matter?
So in other words, you'd like to ban all beliefs except your own. You a fundamentalist atheist. How does this make you any better than any other fundamentalist?
Also, calling Mohammad a pedophile is seriously offensive and I hope the mods delete your comment.
Your persecution complex knee-jerk heuristic is clearly blinding you to the fact that I never said I wanted to ban anything. I just don't want religion (or atheism, for that matter) to be forced on children, much in the same way I don't think they should be given alcohol or had sex with because they cannot be considered competent to make such decisions until the become adults. If they grow up and decide to be religious, so be it. But at least we can then say that their decision was truly free of compulsion and the fear of hell and ostracism instilled into them by their fundie parents (which under any other circumstances would be considered emotional abuse, BTW).
And you don't seem understand what the word fundamentalist means. Atheists don't have any texts or creeds they adhere to, they just don't believe in god, hence there can be no such thing as a fundamentalist atheist.
But, oh, keep the irony coming. "ZOMG, you think religions should be banned! You... you... should be banned!one!!eleventy-one!!"
Hey now! Hold up!! The Prophet is considered to be a pedophile... then what of his first wife? I guess Khadija was the original "courgar" ??
Let's try to be more respectful of religious belief systems pretty please, Marsupial.
I do agree that some (if not all) religious mythology IS kinda whack though.
Yo, I don't know where I stand on this issue...But I love the discourse!
here's an excellent article that outlines both sides of the debate. it's also very interesting that Mohammed Moussaoui, the President of France’s Representative Muslim Council, supported Sarkozy's call for a ban on the burqa. http://www.mindreign.com/en/mindshare/World-Politics-and-Current-Events/Sarkozy-3a-e2-80-9cMuslim-Burqas-are-Unwelcome-e2-80-9d/sl34045952bp295cpp5pn1.html
"To raise the subject like this, via a parliamentary committee, is a way of stigmatizing Islam and the Muslims of France," Mohammed Moussaoui, the head of the French Council for the Muslim Religion, told AFP last week.
"We are shocked by the idea parliament should be put to work on such a marginal issue."
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/06/23/france.burkas/index.html?eref=edition
I see no proof that Moussaoui is supportive of this ban. Got a citation?