When the group in which a girl is socialised (family, peer group, religious group, community centre) insists that a headscarf should be work and the state insists that the headscarf cannot be worn in schools, harm is going to come no matter what. I am not sure a headscarf or a full-body veil can be taken as prima-facie evidence of abuse so the state may be causing a gratuitous conflict within the socialisation groups that the girl belongs to. And if there is abuse the headscarf issue is a distraction. En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
I am not sure a headscarf or a full-body veil can be taken as prima-facie evidence of abuse so the state may be causing a gratuitous conflict within the socialisation groups that the girl belongs to.
I see the point, of course, but you're aware this is a slippery slope: ain't that a bit too comfortable to regard the veil as merely a sign of belonging to a community/group/family?
At the extreme, some could abuse this reasoning and claim that practices such as sexual mutilations, underage girls forced weddings or honor killings are also regular part of a socialization group. Extremists do, actually.
We are discussing this from the outside and standing for the women's right to dress as they see fit. It's all fine and dandy, but I'd like to hear the point of view of the girls and women who are first and foremost affected by the situation. Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
We are discussing this from the outside and standing for the women's right to dress as they see fit. It's all fine and dandy, but I'd like to hear the point of view of the girls and women who are first and foremost affected by the situation.
Reversing the burden of the proof here, much? En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
A burqa is a serious impediment to communication, because it removes most of the body language and facial expression from the conversation. Not to mention the fact that one cannot visually identify the wearer.
A headscarf is a different story by far - it obscures mostly the hair, which carries a far more limited "sideband" for interaction when people communicate. And it poses no issues w.r.t. identifying the wearer.
Now, in most situations there is no law saying that one must be prepared to communicate with one's fellow citizens. And I find a requirement to be visually identifiable in public to be an odious infringement on privacy (particularly in a day and age where surveillance cameras are ever more intrusive and omnipresent). But there are cases - schools, courts, customs, etc. - where either or both identification and communication are of respectable importance, so there is a distinction to be made here on practical as well as aesthetic grounds.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
Speaking of women's PoV: am I the only one having noticed that this diary and the whole comment thread so far is 100% male? What does it say about us? Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
On a serious note, this pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/opinion/28iht-edgopalan.html "Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.
This is not about a fashion faux pas or women's rights, but about sending a message to Muslims. Concerned with increasingly visible numbers of Muslims openly practicing their way of life while enjoying the privileges of life in the West, French citizens and politicians alike feel that they need to restore "Frenchness" to their streets.
This is stupid and ignorant. "increasingly visible numbers of Muslims"?? WTF is he talking about? In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
