Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

only about 2000 women in france wear niqab, many of them french converts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-10 05:00 AM
Original message
only about 2000 women in france wear niqab, many of them french converts
Edited on Sun Aug-08-10 05:04 AM by Hannah Bell
Thus putting the lie to the ideas that the ban is about public safety, or about oppressed women in fear of their male relatives.

The lower house of the French parliament passed a law on Tuesday which, according to the interior ministry, would directly affect fewer than 2,000 people out of a population of 64 million...

Set to one side legal doubts about whether this law is compatible with guarantees of religious freedom and equality, as interpreted by France's constitutional council. In principle – and, indeed, in the forum of the European court of human rights – the twin test must be whether the measure, first, has a legitimate aim (public security or promotion of gender equality, perhaps) and, second, whether it shows proportionality. Is the measure proportionate to the aim being achieved?

It makes the dress illegal on the grounds that it constitutes a challenge to public order – making it harder for police to conduct identity checks. All this is chaff, designed to deflect public opinion from confronting the real issues: what is it about the invisibility of a woman's face that is so challenging to western European identity? What is so important about the niqab that gives the state the right to intervene? Users of the metro or underground learn instinctively to avoid looking each other in the eye. It is regarded as an intrusion. And yet no state legislature would think about passing a law that bans the wearing of sunglasses indoors on the grounds that it poses a threat to national security.


So what is it about the niqab, worn by so few, that threatens so many? And what values, exactly, are being protected? One of the achievements of the European Enlightenment was to liberate the public space as a forum where different cultural identities could interact and negotiate free from the censure of the church... From now on if you see niqab in France, you are encouraged to believe by the state that it because the wearer has something to hide. There could be a bomb lurking underneath. Is this message of fear going to advance the harmony and understanding already in short supply in a multifaith society where 5 million citizens are Muslim?


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/15/france-niqab-veil-ban-law


Veiled threats: row over Islamic dress opens bitter divisions in France

Once a fervent Catholic, Winterstein converted to Islam at 18. Six months ago she began wearing a loose, floor-length black jilbab, showing only her expertly made-up face from eyebrows to chin. She now wants to add the final piece, and wear full niqab, covering her face and leaving just her eyes visible. "But this week, after Sarkozy announced that full veils weren't welcome in France, things have got really difficult," she said... "It's difficult in this country, there's a certain mood in the air. I don't feel comfortable walking around."

This week, France plunged into another bitterly divisive national debate on Muslim women's clothing, reopening questions on how the country with western Europe's biggest Muslim community integrates Islam into its secular republic... Yet the actual numbers of niqab wearers in France appears to be so small that TV news crews have struggled to find individuals to film. Muslim groups estimate that there are perhaps only a few hundred women fully covering themselves out of a Muslim population of over 5 million – often young French women, many of them converts.

Horia Demiati, 30, a French financier who wears a standard headscarf with her business suits, said: "I really fear an increase in hatred." She recently won a discrimination case after she and her family, including a six-month baby, were refused access to a rural holiday apartment they had booked in the Vosges. The woman who refused them argued that she was a secular feminist and didn't want to see the headscarf, "an instrument of women's submission and oppression", in her establishment...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/26/sarkozy-france-paris-islamic-veils


That's some interesting "feminism" there.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RandomThoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-10 05:03 AM
Response to Original message
1. The issue has two questions.
Is it healthy or wrong for the women in question.

Does society have a responsibility to legislate in such matters.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loudmxr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-10 05:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Ray Davies sez
Oh yes he is (oh yes he is), oh yes he is (oh yes he is).
He thinks he is a flower to be looked at,
And when he pulls his frilly nylon panties right up tight,
He feels a dedicated follower of fashion.

Oh yes he is (oh yes he is), oh yes he is (oh yes he is).
There's one thing that he loves and that is flattery.
One week he's in polka-dots, the next week he is in stripes.
'Cause he's a dedicated follower of fashion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbieo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-10 05:48 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. When in Rome - Fifty years ago no one would have given a shit, but times have changed!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-10 06:16 AM
Response to Original message
4. "Converts." Oh, there's a way to allay panic.
Definitely concentrate on that fact.

As for considering it pro-feminist to allow a woman to choose total patriarchal domination, hey, way to go with that one, too.

I note you've moved off the burqa and on to the headscarf which a friend of mine adores because she never has to worry about how her hair looks. Loves the thing.

It still ain't in the Koran. It's cultural. It varies from nation to nation. We cover up when we go to them, they can show a little respect for OUR culture and uncover when they are here.

BTW, how's your defense of polygamy? Because that IS in the Koran. Are they going for four wives in France?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-10 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. lol. we're talking about an article of *clothing* here. your hostility is over the top.
Edited on Sun Aug-08-10 12:45 PM by Hannah Bell
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #4
21.  #4 rating in our list of Most Absurd Statements ever...
"they can show a little respect for OUR culture and uncover when they are here...."


#4 rating in our list of Most Absurd Statements ever...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmallind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-10 07:09 AM
Response to Original message
5. How does a number and a qualifier "put the lie to" a motivation?
I don't see the link at all.

Because there are 2000 not 2,000,000, none of the 2000 are oppressed or a threat to public safety? What's the connection between qty and condition here? How many members were there of the groups that have done any number of terrible things to threaten public safety? Were only large clusters of, say, Armenians or Chinese oppressed by Turkey and Japan respectively?

Maybe because they are converts? Well forgetting for a moment truisms about relative zeal and malleability, can converts be assumed to never be oppressed or a threat to public safety? We have many instances of Muslim converts doing sterling work against public safety just in the last few years, and I am not sure that anyone particularly cares about the conversion status of a powerless group when they target that group for oppression.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 06:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. there haven't been any burka-wearing frenchwomen that did *anything*
to threaten public safety.

and as for whether or not they're oppressed, there are so few you could interview them all & find out.

the article interviewed one who didn't consider herself to be.

convert status indicates some kind of choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmallind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. There weren't any trainee pilots who had doen anything eithere ten years ago.
Risk is about what will or may happen. Not what has.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. yeah, there aren't any ringling brothers clowns yet, either. they can hide a lot
of stuff in those funny pants. and you can't see their faces under that make-up.

your post demonstrates you equate terrorism with muslims.

pfft.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. so is DADT or even a ban on gay soldiers justifed
Edited on Mon Aug-09-10 01:15 PM by dsc
because Braddly Manning is gay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmallind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. There weren't any trainee pilots who had doen anything eithere ten years ago.
Risk is about what will or may happen. Not what has.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. well, obviously the only safe thing to do is lock up all muslims. that's the logic of your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uncommon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
13. You know, a lot of feminists don't enjoy watching other women embrace their oppression.
Shockingly, we find it troubling.

Doesn't mean that woman was right to turn them away - but it also doesn't make her NOT a feminist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. there are a lot of feminists who don't enjoy watching "feminism" used to justify the revocation
Edited on Mon Aug-09-10 01:42 PM by Hannah Bell
of human rights, the growth of the security state, and the murder of hundreds of thousands of women & children, too.

let's see: burka-wearing v. aerial bombing, which is more oppressive, oh it's so hard to decide.

first it's about "choice," but when the women "choose" to wear the burka, it's about something else. hypocrites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. LOL. You weren't so outraged by the "security state" when it was spycams. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. lol. you mean i *was* outraged by the unwarranted claims that school principals, teachers &
Edited on Mon Aug-09-10 01:31 PM by Hannah Bell
janitors were indiscrimately peeping at kids in hopes of catching them naked so they could masturbate in front of school computers, don't you?

accusations which have turned out to be totally unfounded, something the hysterical accusers will never acknowledge.

as for the spycams themselves, i repeatedly said they shouldn't be used, something the hysterics will never acknowledge either, since according to them any challenge of their wild accusations of pedophilia & voyeurism = support for the policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. The button still works, I see.
Edited on Mon Aug-09-10 01:58 PM by woo me with science
And what a vociferous opponent you were! :rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. hysterics' misrepresentations = par for the course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Hannah, have I ever told you
how much I enjoy your presence on DU?

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. have i ever told you how amusing it is to watch the "enlightened" classes
puff themselves up as they fall in line with the agenda of repression?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. You champion of freedom, you!
What would Muslim women, and the Lower Merion IT department, do without you?!

:yourock: :fistbump: :headbang:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. i'll leave you to your games & obsessions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. I know you are very busy! It is a big job
defending niqab and spycam!

Keep up the good work! :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. I miss those Lower Merion threads........n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. I think I know exactly what you mean...
Edited on Mon Aug-09-10 03:04 PM by woo me with science
Threads like this are sort of like "Archie Bunker's Place" to "All in the Family,"

or "The Lucy Show" instead of "I Love Lucy."

They will never attain quite the same level of deliciousness, but I just can't pass them up out of pure nostalgia.

:loveya: :nopity: :cry: :grouphug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. I miss the spirited defense of racist, perverted school administrators.....
Actually, lots happening in that case(s). The District is trying to settle, mightily....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uncommon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #16
29. "hysterics" really?
And we are supposed to take your views of feminism seriously?

Cute.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uncommon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
28. You can't "choose" oppression - you bow down to it or you don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. lol. that's why american women get boob jobs & face lifts. bomb 'em.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uncommon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-10 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. American women embrace their own oppression all the time.
It's exactly the same. And it shouldn't be ignored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
31. fascists always pretend their restrictions of democratic freedoms are necessary to "protect" someone
but they're not, they're just fascism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 04:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC