France: Burqa Ban in Action « A Pseudo-Ottoman Blog: Occasional Musings

France's hotly-debated and much-derided burqa ban is now the law of the land. These women who defied the ban by walking outside the famed Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris were immediately arrested by police and now face fines or community service. Ramin Mazaheri, Press TV, Paris (11 April 2011).   Even though this newly enacted French legal code cannot be described as anything but "racist", "sexist", and "counter-productive", the right-wing British, daily middle market tabloid newspaper Daily Mail gave a certain Dr. Taj Hargey the opportunity to spout some nonsensical common-sense into the world: the "decision by the French government to outlaw all forms of public face-masking, including the burka and niqab, is welcomed by all thinking Muslims around the world. The Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford which has pioneered an enlightened and egalitarian Islam salutes France for its bold legislative steps to eradicate this hideous tribal dress code that is deliberately given a completely false veneer of Islam".[1]  As the Press TV report indicates, the French authorities presume to know what individual Muslim women think and feel, as they themselves have been so oppressed by their male counterparts that they are unable to . . . think for themselves. Hence, the French state as the bastion of women's rights and male prerogatives just had to step in and take over. Irrespective of individual religious beliefs or ideological stances, the mere fact that state authorities in France have now assumed responsibility for the proper attire of women somehow seems to indicate that individual freedom in France has suddenly become a virtue that cannot be enjoyed by veiled women. Instead, in good old paternalistic fashion, the French state has now decided that it knows women better than . . . women do themselves. Nowadays, for women in France, freedom has come to mean conforming to the requirements of pleasing the male gaze in more or less revealing attire.

 This situation is somewhat reminiscent of the state of affairs in Turkey, albeit a lot more extreme. As I pointed out in an op-ed in the Hürriyet Daily News last month, "nowadays, the term [secularism], particularly in its French form of laicité (at the root of Turkey's laiklik), denotes a strict separation of church (or religion) and state. And, the theory is that Turkey, as a result of the reform movement, known as the İnkılap, is a secular state. In reality, however, ever since the Turkish state abolished the Caliphate and the Ministry of Pious Endowments in 1924, the Turkish Republic has regulated its citizens' religious life through the Religious Affairs Directorate, or Diyanet, a branch of government attached to the office of the prime minister. Consequently, proponents of secularism in Turkey quite naturally feel the need to attach a lot of importance to certain symbolic issues: the availability of alcoholic beverages springs to mind, as well as the thorny headscarf issue, or rather the notion that women possess the freedom to don more or less revealing outfits (arguably, to please the male gaze). Let us call these charged matters "beer and bikinis" as a shorthand for the contentious topic of Turkish secularism in the 21st century".[ii]  In Turkey, the niqab or burka is replaced by the modest headscarf, but just like in France, supposed secularists in Turkey argue that girls and women wearing these textile contraptions are merely acting as hapless conduits for male political agendas. But unlike France, Turkish argumentation does not readily wield concepts like male oppression of feeble females in its debates with proponents of . . . religious headgear. In Turkey, the issue is fused with the matter of employing religious symbols for political purposes.   But now in France, a woman is only as free as her willingness not to wear a full face veil . . . On the website Colorlines.com, 'a daily news site offering award-winning reporting, analysis, and solutions to today's racial justice issues', Asraa Mustufa declares that "[v]eiled women in France now risk facing a fine of €150 ($215) and a citizenship course or up to 4 hours of detainment for donning the Muslim niqab or burqa outside their homes, though not jail time. Anyone who forces a woman to wear the veil could face up to a year in prison and a €30,000 fine ($43,000), possibly double that if the veil-wearer is a minor. Police have complained that the law will be difficult to apply. The law was crafted to not mention the words "women", "Muslim" or "veil", instead saying that it is illegal to hide the face in the public space, but it is clearly targeted at members of the country's largest religious minority".[3]  In other words, rather than being honest in his desire to court the right vote in France, Sarko has coated his obviously racist and discriminatory legislation in neutral language which hides the direct purpose of the new code. Jacques Myard of France's ruling UPM party told Al Jazeera: "We feel that [wearing a full face veil] is contrary to equality of sexes, dignity of a person, and it's creating a ghetto, you know? Because those ladies refuse that we see her face, and this is unbearable in the tradition".[4]  Because it stands to reason that men know what is best for women, in good old paternalistic fashion. Mustufa adds that "[a]bout a dozen people demonstrated against the ban [on Monday, 11 April] in front of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris, protesting it as an infringement of freedom of expression and religion. Two protesters wearing face veils were arrested for taking part in the unauthorized protest, and were released after three and a half hours. About 60 people were arrested in another protest on Saturday [, 9 April]".[5] 

 

 Dr. Taj Hargey, "The burka is an alien, cultural monstrosity…. and it CAN be banned in Britain" The Daily Mail (11 April 2011). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1375770/The-burka-oppresses-women-required-Islamic-law–doesnt-mean-Britain-follow-Frances-footsteps.html.

[2] C. Erimtan, "Secularism, beer and bikinis" Hürriyet Daily News (10 March 2011). http://tiny.cc/6msiy.