veiled4allah

debate over niqab in Britain

There's a huge controversy in Britain over remarks that Jack Straw, the former Foreign Secretary, made about niqab (the face veil). Straw is an MP whose constituency in Blackburn is about 25-30% Muslim. Straw first said that when women constituents who wear the niqab come to seek help from him, he asks them to uncover their faces. Later, he said that he wished Muslim women would not wear face veils at all. He feels that it makes community relations more difficult because it is a symbol of separation, and also he personally finds it difficult to talk to people when he can't see their faces. I've talked before (such as this lengthly discussion in comments) about wanting to restrict Muslim women from veiling. In my opinion, this is not better than those who want to force Muslim women to veil. In both cases, it takes away a woman's basic autonomy to choose how she wishes to dress. Additionally, in a free society, we accept that others may make choices that we don't understand or even that we find offensive and in return we expect that others will accept our own choices, even if they don't understand them or find them offensive. This is what freedom of expression and freedom of religion are all about. I'm particularly concerned with this because of Straw's position as an elected representative. What if a woman is too shy or is unwilling or unable to remove her niqab for some reason? Does this mean that he won't help her? If we are concerned about Muslims not participating enough in society, how does excluding them from the political process (such as having the right to bring their concerns to their MP) help this problem? It doesn't, it makes it worse. As an elected representative, Straw should be available to all his constituents, whatever they may dress like, and if he wants to encourage Muslims to become a fuller part of British society, he should be making it easier, not more difficult, for them to come to him. It's hard not to think that maybe he was doing this to seek publicity for himself. Only Allah SWT knows what is in his heart, but the end result has been to give even more negative publicity to a community that already feels demonized and under siege. Like Straw's policy on the dress of his female constituents, this is likely to have the exact opposite effect of what he intends - it will only make Muslims withdraw further, and make non-Muslims withdraw from Muslims in return, and worsen community relations. Great job, dude. Here is some good commentary on the issue. First are some columns by non-Muslim journalists and commentators: Double Jack's Standards, by Mike Marqusee Jack Straw's veil comments threaten to inflame racism, by Socialist Worker What Not to Wear, by Vikram Dodd It's a New and Dangerous Game, by Ian Bell Here are some comments from British Muslim bloggers: Open Season on Muslims, by Indigo Jo Muslims as Political Footballs, by Thabet The Polite Guide to Demonizing Muslims, by Julaybib Blaming the Veil is Wrong, by Rajnaara Akhtar Incitement to Hatred, by Soumaya Ghannoushi Some people noted the following news story: Veil Snatched from Muslim Woman. Hopefully this is completely unrelated. P.S. There is a difference of opinion among Muslims about whether the niqab is obligatory or voluntary (I believe the latter). Even those who consider it to be obligatory allow women to remove their niqabs for the purpose of verifying their identity (1, 2). This includes business dealings, giving testimony, and appearing in court. It's not clear whether this would cover professional dealings with an MP and in any case, Straw didn't mention verifying identity. I've also written about legal issues relating to face veils and about understanding the face veil. Update 10/11: Some other good comments on this issue, from non-Muslim journalists and commentators: Lifting the veil on Enlightenment-British-European-Western values, by Lenin's Tomb Veiled Threats, from Caron's Musings The Jackboots of Our Time, by George Galloway, MP Jack Straw has unleashed a storm of prejudice and intensified division, by Madeleine Bunting (this one is excellent) Stop Scapegoating Muslims, by Socialist Worker Sorry, but we can't just pick and choose what to tolerate, by David Edgar And from British Muslim bloggers: My life behind the niqab, by Rahmanara Chowdhury Woolas: Appease the far right, by Indigo Jo You wanted debate, Jack? You've sure got on, by Abu Eesa The politics of choice, by Soumaya Ghannoushi I'm tired of being a political football, by Sunny Hundal Update 10/18: In the last few days, the debate has moved on from Straw's original remarks to the case of Aishah Azmi, a niqab-wearing teaching assistant. Azmi was suspended from her job because the school said that she refused to take off her niqab in front of the students. Azmi said that she had no problem with taking off her niqab in front of children (and indeed, veiling has never been required around children) but that she kept it on when male teachers were around. A number of politicians, including recently prime minister Tony Blair himself have spoken on the issue, supporting her suspension (in my opinion, they should have stayed out of it and let the employment tribunal decide the case). Here is some recent non-Muslim commentary about niqab, including the Azmi case, and also about Islamophobia in Britain: If someone freely chooses to wear a niqab, what skin is it off your nose? by Timothy Garton Ash What Not to Wear, by Andrew Rilstone Religious practises are part of peoples' identities, by Yael Simon I'm Catholic. I'm also sane. But these days people find it hard to accept that religion and rationality can co-exist, by Martin Newland Speak freely but carefully, by the Editors of the Guardian They've lost the plot, by Dave Hill Dismay over debate which creates divisions, by Michael White If this onslaught was about Jews, I would be looking for my passport, by Jonathan Freedland Veiling discussions by white people who don't know what they're talking about suck, by R. Mildred Some recent Muslim commentary: Garton Ash, Bennett, and Berkoff on niqab, by Indigo Jo So much for the sisterhood, by Salma Yaqoob The veil and the limits of English tolerance, by Yahya Birt A battle of insults, by Anas al-Tikriti Incitement to violence, by Daud Abdullah

going undercover in Cairo

Kerry McIntosh, an American student in Cairo, writes about her experiment wearing the niqab (face veil):

Toward the end of the fall semester, I decided to change my look for a day. One afternoon I went downtown and in the only public bathroom I knew of -- which ironically happened to be at a nearby McDonald's restaurant -- changed into a "niqab," a full Islamic veil. I would spend the afternoon as a veiled woman and go shopping at an outdoor market, for once not being an obvious Westerner.

She discusses why women may choose this form of dress:

Theological reasons for wearing the niqab in Islam are complex and numerous. The increasing popularity of the niqab and other more conservative forms of women's dress may also reflect a backlash against the Western conceptualization of feminism and the objectification of women's bodies in both Arabic and Western pop cultures. The niqab can also be worn for more practical reasons. In Egypt, men vastly outnumber women in nearly every public setting, and even the most modestly dressed woman on the street is not immune to the incessant hissing, catcalls and sexual comments from men. The niqab offers a way for women to fully conceal their bodies in hopes of defraying such negative attention and keeping their sexuality hidden from the public eye. Women who wear the niqab are neither out of touch with modern society nor always conservative when not in public. A friend of mine who frequents a gym popular with upper-class Egyptians recalled once seeing a woman come dressed in full niqab who, once in the privacy of the locker room, stripped down to Spandex shorts and a sports bra. The wearers of the niqab, I feel, are keenly aware of the intricacies and paradoxes of the women's roles in contemporary Egyptian society, and they choose to dress as they do in order to reshape their role within that society.

Although her experiment didn't last long, she learned a few things from it:

To wear such a covering, to present oneself in such a way, takes an incredible amount of inner conviction, which I lack. And whatever sentiment is driving that conviction must be strongly and deeply felt. My experiment with the niqab, if nothing else, allowed me to step outside myself in order to see better how those around me and I fit into Egyptian society, in all its complexity and chaos. And while I doubt I'm going to wear the niqab again anytime soon, I have a greater respect for those who do wear it. The next day, when my American friends and I returned to the market and bought pastries from a woman dressed in a niqab, I looked at her and remembered how, if only for three hours, I'd had a glimpse into her world.

Via Dervish.

the politics of the veil

One of the things that's the most frustrating to me as a Muslim woman who chooses to veil is the monolithic image many people in the West have of veiling, assuming that it must be a bad thing and that it must be something a woman is forced by a man to do rather than being something she chooses. Many feminists deplore the way that women's sexuality is used to sell things and the societal expectations that women have to be thin and beautiful to succeed. Yet when a woman chooses not to display her sexuality or to take part in the beauty game, somehow this is seen as bizarre. Women's studies professor Amira Jarmakani has been looking into the issue. Some highlights:

As part of her research, Jarmakani collected images of Arab womanhood in the United States, which fell into three basic categories: the veil, the harem and the belly dancer.

Talk about a stereotypical and one-dimensional portrayal!

Although American readings of such images assume the veil as an unwanted restriction on the woman, this is not necessarily the case. "The practice seems to be about the forced enclosure and restriction of women, rather than about sacred privacy and sanctity," Jarmakani said. "Furthermore, the interpretation of the veil as an absolute boundary for women and as a barrier for the colonial or imperial gaze ignores its function in many Muslim societies as a garment that enables, rather than restricts women from movement between and among a variety of public institutions and contexts." Jarmakani criticized the "simplistic equation of being uncovered, unveiled or revealed with being modern or emancipated," which demands that Arab women expose themselves to Western eyes.

If you want to really learn a lot about this issue, I recommend Veil: Modesty, Privacy, and Resistance, which is one of the best books I've read on the subject. I reviewed it briefly earlier focusing on a small aspect of the book, which is the veiling of men.

The veil also serves an important purpose in the context of militarism by "demonstrat[ing] the supposed inferiority of the Arab male's excessive patriarchy, and function[ing] as justification for U.S. military action." "During both the 1991 Gulf War and the 2001 military action against Afghanistan, mainstream U.S. feminist organizations ... demonstrated seemingly unknowing collusion with the hegemonic project of U.S. imperialism," Jarmakani said. "The National Organization for Women acted in cooperation with the military ... by demanding that Arab women in the region align themselves against their 'overly oppressive' male relatives in the midst of a crushingly aggressive U.S. offensive. Similarly, the Feminist Majority rallied around the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan ... in the interest of advancing its long-waged cause of liberating Afghan women from the brutal oppression of the Taliban." Jarmakani suggested an alternate form of action that such organizations could have taken. "In formulating a feminist antiwar agenda, NOW might have more effectively attacked the U.S. military for posing as liberators of Arab women and for their treatment of U.S. military women," Jarmakani said. "Likewise, the Feminist Majority might have more effectively worked toward the liberation of women in Afghanistan by developing a critical consciousness about the U.S. goal in over 25 years of devastating conflicts throughout the region which utilized Afghanistan as a literal battleground for its own power struggles."

Here we get to the most radical part of the critique, which is Jarmakani's real point. The views that we have about Islam and about Muslim countries because of the issue of veiling may lead us to go along with policies that we would not otherwise support. And in general, when we treat Muslims as Other and don't make any attempt to understand how they view the world or to look at whether there may be rational reasons for Muslim practices and customs, then we miss an opportunity to work for peace and greater understanding. I really wish that more people would really take the time to think about these issues.

British Muslim girl wins right to wear jilbab to school

The jilbab is a long coat that some Muslim women believe is religiously obligatory to wear out in public. Shabina Begum had originally worn shalwar kameez (a long tunic and trousers) and hijab (headscarf) to school, as the school's dress code permits. However, she later became convinced through her study that the jilbab was religiously obligatory, and decided to wear it to school. However, the school expelled her for wearing the jilbab. She eventually transferred to another school that permitted her to wear the jilbab. She also brought suit, and a British court today ruled in her favor (also here), saying that her rights had been violated:

Lord Justice Brooke, vice-president of the civil division of the court of appeal, called on the Department for Education and Skills to give schools more guidance on how to comply with their obligations under the Human Rights Act. He ruled that her school had: * unlawfully excluded her * unlawfully denied her the right to manifest her religion * unlawfully denied her access to suitable and appropriate education. The schoolgirl was represented by Cherie Booth QC in a landmark case that has been fought through the courts for more than a year. Ms Booth told the judges at a hearing last December that the case involved "fundamental issues" about the nature and interpretation of Shabina's rights to education and freedom to practise her religion... ...The Muslim Council of Britain welcome the court's decision. Its secretary general, Iqbal Sacranie, said: "This is a very important ruling on the issue of personal freedoms. Many other schools have willingly accommodated Muslim schoolgirls wearing the jilbab. The British Muslim community is a diverse community in terms of the interpretation and understanding of their faith and its practice. Within this broad spectrum, those that believe and choose to wear the jilbaband consider it to be part of their faith requirement for modest attire [and] should be respected. Today's judgment is a clear reflection of that common sense approach." The general scretary of the National Union of Teachers, Steve Sinnott, said it was important that schools respected the religious traditions of the communities represented among their pupils. "There is no reason why the colour of any school's uniform, for example, cannot be used for the jilbab. "Schools have to take account of genuine health and safety concerns in subjects such as science or physical education but answers can be found to these practical problems." He added that the union would be issuing guidance to its members on the jilbab in schools. "That guidance has been drawn up following consultation with the Muslim Council of Great Britain, the Institute of Race Relations, the General Teaching Council, headteachers, local authorities and others."

I think that Sinnott has a very sensible and commendable attitude. Surely as long as the attire raises no health and safety concerns, and doesn't pose a danger or threat to anybody (which a coat hardly does), then there should be a way to compromise, rather than just sending students home because they don't "dress right" and therefore denying them an education. The Guardian has an interview with Begum (note: there appears to be a typographical error in the Quranic reference, which should be to 33:59 not 3:59). Added: (Non-Muslim) British blogger Meaders keeps it short and sweet:

The case for socialists and progressives should be obvious: Muslim women are as competent to dictate their own appearance as any other, and attempts to deny them this right should be treated - not just as an assualt on religious freedom - but as a denial of women's rights made on flagrantly prejudicial lines.

Another British blogger, lenin, responds to the comments on Meaders's site with a slightly different view, but concludes:

Britain, too, marginalises and oppresses Muslims in a variety of ways - usually by denying them employment opportunities, housing them inadequately, subjecting them to the rough end of the state's monopoly on violence. There is here a legitimate claim by British Muslims in response to this, which is that those who want to are entitled to reinforce their identity as Muslims. Since they are subject to 'ascriptive humiliation', targeted for who they are not what they do, they have a right to demand the fullest cultural expression that is commensurable with the human rights of others and those within their 'encompassed group'. It is on these and like grounds that I maintain the right to wear the hijab or jellaba [ed. note: another name for jilbab] is a matter of universal human rights.

See also here for more from Meaders. It's a good debate to follow.

death threat for hijab

Steve Gilliard points to this story about a Belgian man who faced death threats for employing a Muslim woman who wears hijab (the headscarf):

"You are a bad Belgian and you have signed your own death warrant." That was the message to factory owner Rik Remmery when he opened his mail one morning just before Christmas. For ex-policeman Rik it was only the start of an angry and chilling tirade of threatening post. Further letters put a 250,000 euro ($326,000; £173,000) price on his head and a final package contained a bullet. By now the letters were coming to his family home as well as his factory. "December," another letter read "will be a nightmare." The death threats against Rik were caused by one simple fact - he employed a Muslim woman who wore a headscarf to work. Somebody, somewhere in the small town of Ledegem in West Flanders did not like that and was prepared to take extreme action unless Rik sacked Naima Amzil. But Rik stood firm. "She's worked here for eight years. I accepted her with a headscarf and I will not change my mind because of one sick person," he said. Naima was horrified when she found out about the threats. She could not believe someone would react to her simple white headscarf in such a manner. Originally from Morocco, she had done everything possible to integrate into Belgian society - speaking French and Dutch and carrying a Belgian passport. Her work colleagues rallied around her. The Unizo union of independent employers organised an internet petition of support which eventually racked up more than 25,000 names. But as the letters kept coming, the pressure and fear grew. In the end, with the police at a dead end in their investigation, Naima decided to act. She removed her headscarf to work on the factory floor. Health and safety regulations meant she wore a hairnet at work anyway and that allowed her to stay true to her religious beliefs... ...Naima and Rik's story is symptomatic of the suspicion and extremism rearing its head against many of Europe's Muslims.

What is using violence or the threat of violence to achieve your aims, if not a form of terrorism? Update 3/3: The death threats continue so that Naima has chosen to quit her job. A very sad development.

evil headscarf menace continues to terrorize people

In the news:

The southern German state of Bavaria has become the latest of the country's federal states to ban Muslim school teachers from wearing headscarves. The Bavarian parliament approved the measure after Culture Minister Monika Hohlmeier argued that the headscarf was a symbol of the repression of women. Three other German states - Lower Saxony, Baden-Wuerttemberg and Saarland - have already imposed similar bans. Displaying Christian and Jewish symbols will still be allowed in Bavaria. (source)

<sarcasm>Because, you know, the biggest threat facing us is a square of fabric on a woman's head. It's such an abomination that it must be banned.</sarcasm>

finally, some good news on the hijab front

Via Peter in the comments, there's an update to a hijab case that I first posted about last October. Nashala Hearn is a student at a public school in Oklahoma. She had been suspended from school for wearing the hijab. The school's policy banning headgear did not make an exemption for headgear worn for religious reasons. The school's ban would also prohibit Jewish students from wearing yarmulkes (a side note to those who defend hijab ban policies: are you also defending banning Jewish men from wearing yarmulkes? Do you think that your views would go over very well with Jews? If not, then you should understand why hijab bans don't go over very well with Muslims). CNN reports today that the federal government's civil lawyers have intervened in Hearn's case by filing a motion in her favor. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Alex Acosta, wrote:

No student should be forced to choose between following her faith and enjoying the benefits of a public education... ...We certainly respect local school systems' authority to set dress standards, and otherwise regulate their students, but such rules cannot come at the cost of constitutional liberties... Religious discrimination has no place in American schools.

As I noted in my October entry, Hearn had been permitted to return to the school but the anti-headgear policy remains in force and the school has apparently told Hearn that she could be suspended again at any time for violation of the policy if they so choose. Hence, her lawsuit asking for the school to change its policy is still alive. Here again is a link to an explanation by constitutional scholar and law professor Jack Balkin why the hijab ban is contrary to Oklahoma law. Despite the title of my blog, I really don't intend this to be a site that's all about hijab, and about hijab bans. However, as long as people are trying to restrict the basic personal autonomy and freedom of expression of Muslim women - by limiting their freedom to dress as they choose - I will keep posting about it because to me such policies are wrong. I also think that they're misguided. They will only upset and offend Muslims and if the aim is to help Muslims integrate into Western society, these laws will only have the opposite effect. You will never get anyone to like you by limiting their rights. You just won't.

more nations quail in fear of the mighty headscarf

First France, then Germany, now Italy:

The debate over headscarves that divided France has reached Italy, with a kindergarten asking a Muslim trainee teacher to remove her headscarf because it might frighten children... ...The issue arose last week when a private kindergarten in Samone, in northern Italy, voiced concern about the headscarf worn by a prospective intern, Moroccan-born Fatima Mouyache, who was being placed by a teacher training service. The Miele & Cri-Cri kindergarten said it had agreed to accommodate Mouyache's schedule of daily prayers, but asked the training service if she would be willing to remove her headscarf. The school said it feared it might frighten the students. In a statement sent to media organizations, the kindergarten said it wasn't acting out of prejudice but merely to avoid "the negative reaction of the children who aren't used to seeing this type of dress" and the possibility that parents might be uncomfortable with it. In an interview Thursday in the Rome daily La Repubblica, Mouyache said she couldn't understand how the veil, which covers her hair but not her face, could frighten anyone. If it did make children afraid, she said she could be flexible: "In front of women and children, I can take it off," she said. After the story was publicized, the town council in nearby Ivrea offered Mouyache a position in another kindergarten and she accepted. "We decided to offer her a position at the nursery in Ivrea to complete her training, with or without the veil, just as she likes," Andrea Benedino, a municipal official in Ivrea, said. While saying many Samone parents agreed with the school's position, Benedino said he too didn't understand how the veil could frighten children, noting it was similar to those worn by Catholic nuns.

I'm sorry, but if you're "frightened" by a piece of fabric on a woman's head, you've got some major problems. This kind of thing is just ridiculous. :rolleyes:

France hijab saga continues

One of the reasons that the hijab ban in France concerns me is that I don't think it will stop at public schools. I fear that there will be steps to ban hijab in other public places as well, until it really is impossible for hijabi women to take part in French society. It appears that I'm right to worry, according to a news report:

Chirac has also called for new rules to allow private businesses to ban Muslim head scarves and other religious symbols -- including Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses.

Most of the news report is about a pro-hijab rally held in Paris:

Thousands of French Muslims -- many of them women wearing head scarves of various styles and colors -- marched through the rain-drenched streets of Paris on Sunday in the first large show of opposition to President Jacques Chirac's call for a law banning veils and other overt religious symbols from public classrooms. Many of the women carried signs reading "Don't Touch My Veil!" and "I Vote," a reminder to France's political leadership that the country's estimated 5 million to 7 million Muslims could constitute a formidable voting bloc, with regional elections coming in March. The crowd, which moved from the Place de la Republique to the Bastille, a traditional protest route, chanted and walked behind large banners with other slogans, such as "The Veil Is Our Choice" and "Yes to Secularism, No to Islamophobia." The multiracial crowd was sprinkled with hundreds of French tricolor flags, and the marchers occasionally sang the French anthem, the Marseillaise. "French and Muslim -- and Proud!" one banner read.

another nation trembles in fear of the mighty headscarf

Bavaria, Germany, to ban headscarf in schools. Notice that Christian and Jewish symbols will be allowed, only Muslim headscarves are banned. Shameful.