The French ban on Muslims wearing their veil in school - State Racism or A Necessary Move Towards a Secular Society?

this thread is actually a good question (for once)

I don't think I've formed an opinion on this yet, havent read enough about it.

Many think the veil is an oppression of women, including Muslims, and many do not.

As for where I stand... I'm not sure it's an oppresion of the woman herself chooses to wear it. I do think when women choose to cover up in black with only that little thing to look through... hmm, I'm not sure why you'd want to do that. Maybe someone can enlighten me?

(x-post)

What I want to know is; can christian girls where the hijab in french public buildings it not being a symbol of their religion.

Yeah it's a ban on all forms of religious practice but the outcry only seems to have come from the banning of the veil.

I meant that line. Can you explain further?

The problem with this law is that It essentially it's legislating against concience and thought. Can a muslim girl wear a veil if she says she is not a muslim?

My atheism is pretty strong and I just as soon see all gods swept into the bin but making laws against freedom of expression is not what I want to see.

Sikhs also protested because they are not supposed to remove their turbans in public.

It is actually a fascinating subject. I watched most of the Channel 4 documentary covering this subject earlier. I think forcing a ban on the wearing of these things will do more harm than good in the short term and is a bad idea. That said I find these religious associations to be generally very constraining and somewhat illogical (some ignorance on my part possibly). Hardly revelatory stuff I know. The interesting quandary is whether we should be concentrating on establishing a more tolerant society rather than a more secular one, if you know what I mean.

point well taken, although it wasn't quite 'jumping on' - unfortunately you never know what the outcome will be in these situations.

Therefore, I do wonder the logic behind anyone who wants to dress from head to toe in black with only a small hole to look out in a country such as the UK. It does seem like a very odd thing to want to do. I admit that I also cannot see why anyone would want to/ or could actually STOP people from doing it (hey, freedom of expression and all that)...

presumably because these powerful visual reminders of cultural and religious differences are considered by many too painful perhaps, esp. when they advocate this secular society notion as the French seem to.

That's one helluva presumption. That someone is highly religious does not make them racist. Your example scenario would potentially highlight the racist mindset of the parents, were they to react badly. (this is not necessarily due to their religious beliefs, but simply preconceived ideas as to 'the other') If they weren't racist, then maybe they'd attempt to convert their child's new boyfriend/girlfriend - no?

A bit harsh because although not as pertinent as the issue of pushing for more tolerance and equality in society regardless of creed, culture and attire, the question of the real worth of said attire is still perhaps worth asking (does holding to these customs hold society back in some ways? spiritual development/evolution for example?), and isn't it only such a thorny issue because this is being required for schools where uniform is mandatory in so many places and too many compromises there defeats the purpose of uniform in the first place (we all hated having to wear them i'm sure) but the idea, however unsound you may feel it to be, was to encourage equality (we're all dressed the same so let's all treat each other the same) no?

Where do you get that idea. I think the french view on foreign culture is all about the tension between enlightened tolerance and bigoted self preservation all wrapped up in the french sense of the superiority of their own culture. (this is painting with the broadest brushstrokes but it is after all the country that has the produced academie francaise and a law mandating that 40% of all music on the radio should be in french)

Probably a good idea.

Pass me the razorblade!

GILETTE! GILETTE!

The wearing of hijab is not in the Koran: all it says re. modesty is to 'hide your beauty' and it is for this reason that women in the middle east etc. did not veil themselves unless their families were a bit Wahadi (sp) before the mid-'70s (ie. just when the mullahs/male population began getting shit-scared about women's rights). The Iranian granny in the doc who was all, 'goodness me, I forgot to wear this silly thing on camera' is pretty average - if you check out Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi, you'll see what happened behind closed doors during the Iranian revolution.

Samira Ahmed also said this was in some ways another take on teenage girls using their choice of clothes to piss off their elders.

Well, not really: what's interesting here is that it was in France where a) Hollywood cinema was first properly appreciated (in the Forties and Fifties) and b) where Iranian cinema was first appreciated (from the late Eighties). Their film culture is still infinitely more cosmopolitan than England's or the US's.

The Iranian cinema gives some interesting persepctives on this. In 'Crimson Gold' there are hardly any shots of women indoors, because the censors say you can only show women indoors wearing the veil. Because this contradicts reality, the director just decided to omit any such scenes.

yes the ban does cover kepot etc. too but it seems to have been the head scarves that prompted it, and certainly given the size and recent visibility of the muslim population here it's been the aspect that's got almost all the attenion--though granted France 5 ran a story about orthodox jews protesting the move as well. in america most strict orthodox jews don't attend public schools...strange...

this doesn't really seem like the time--i mean, given world circumstances--to promote what seems to me an overzealous form of secularism.

Enrique now OTM. Same can be said about pulp fiction, jazz or so-called 'world music'. The fascination for the cultural output from the old colonies, say, North and West Africa, is much stronger than in UK (and obv. the US).

I was going to make a point about school uniform but they don't have that in France that I've seen (not commonplace anyway). If they did it'd make this a lot more consistent.

Er... I know that there are different kinds of hijab - the one which covers just the hair, and the one which covers the entire head with just a slit for the eyes. I could imagine getting very pissed off if I was trying to teach someone wearing the latter. It'd be hell to invigilate in exams, too.

this is not an attempt to liberate muslim women to my understanding

it's an attempt to create what in my mind seems a false equality in the classroom

sort of like uniforms

"A lot of Muslim girls say that they wear the headscarf freely... But in fact when you look at it carefully you will see that they are in some cases, in fact in most cases, motivated by religious fundamentalists and if you give them just a bit of a finger they will eat up your arm up to the elbow. So we have to be strict and very adamant - and say this is the way things are in France." (Jacques Myard of the UMP)

It's telling that in all the debate very few of Chirac's allies have actually picked up on his 'secularism' talk - most of the 'unofficial' anti-headscarf line is to do with the liberation of women etc.

If they are trying to create uniforms why don't they just HAVE uniforms? If you're going to let pupils dress how they want (to an extent) this logic would encompass religious symbols.

Of course, thoroughly unworkable.

If they erase all traces of Christianity from the Englightenment inheritance then they have my best wishes. j/k.

(cf Lagaan!)

x-post mind meld horror.