# Something aggressive about veils, says Chirac



## mahdokht (Dec 2, 2002)

_Jacques Chirac hinted strongly yesterday that France will soon introduce legislation banning Muslim girls from wearing headscarves to school, saying most French people saw "something aggressive" in the veil and that the secular state could not tolerate "ostentatious signs of religious proselytism"._

http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/sto...101321,00.html

That's it damn it! From now on my croissant will have a little extra bread in the shape of a star and im callin em islamicrecents. Forget liberty fries I'm gonna cook 'em with the skins and call em hijabi fries!

This one's for you Jackie Boy:








:







:







:







:







:







:







:







:







:

































































hehehe i've been DYING to use that hijabi smilie. Am I the first?


----------



## CerridwenLorelei (Aug 28, 2002)

would post after reading the article I had yesterday

Banning Scarves, yarmulkes and LARGE Christian crosses -it didn't say if the small ones would be allowed...

I thought I bet Mahdokt and USAmama would have some things to say about this and can't wait to see it..


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

uke

So, can a non muslim wear a scarf?

Kay


----------



## Meiri (Aug 31, 2002)

That's a good question Kay.

I wonder if enough other women and girls, realizing how stupid this concept is, wearing their scarves would change this.

What will this do to French fashion industry?









The first article I read on this a few days ago, over at www.witchvox.com/xwrensnest.html, said something about how the schools there want to promote diversity. I asked how it promotes diversity to squash all expressions of it.


----------



## merpk (Dec 19, 2001)

Well, the yarmulke ban is sort of moot at this point.

The Chief Rabbi of France has already advised Jewish men not to wear yarmulkes in public, and to wear baseball caps/other hats instead of yarmulkes, quite some time ago, because of the violence against Jews in France.


----------



## feebeeglee (Nov 30, 2002)

Sure sure, yer all thinking, but this is France, it can't happen here...

http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/...33_comment.php

Quote:

An 11-year-old Oklahoma girl has been suspended from a public school because officials said her Muslim head scarf violates dress code policies....

A school attorney said *federal education rules adopted in 1998* (emphasis added) do not allow for exceptions for religious beliefs.

"As I see it right now, I don't think we can make a special accommodation for religious wear," said school attorney D.D. Hayes. "You treat religious items the same as you would as any other item, no better, no worse. Our dress code prohibits headgear, period."

He added that, under the dress code, a Jewish child would not be allowed to wear a yarmulke, the skullcap traditionally worn by orthodox Jews, to school.
My DS is stirring, must run...

Let me just add









eta: just noticed the debate on the linked page above, hmmm.


----------



## merpk (Dec 19, 2001)

feebeeglee, ya' know, I usually don't read the opinions at the end of those news stories, because they end up being racist rants or that sort of nonsense ... but in re: the Oklahoma story, the last poster on there now, her name is Aisha Shahid, wrote an excellent post, and made the point that the school was just following its rules, and she doesn't blame the school as the rule was there, and after it was challeneged, the rule was found to be unconstitutional (interfering as it does with the free exercise of religion), and so it was changed.

I love a happy ending.









France, however, is another story.


----------



## simonee (Nov 21, 2001)

Why doesn't one of those couture designers act out of solidarity to create a Hermes-type scarf that all women MUST wear that season?







:

Oh, there wouldn't be any of that aggressive proselytizing involved. That bugs me, you know ~ every time I see a Muslima in hijab, she tries to force me to become a Muslim myself. And a terrorist, too.







:

While fashion isn't about aggressive proselytizing of course. Just about a way to force us to either spend money or be considered last season's news


----------



## feebeeglee (Nov 30, 2002)

Yay! Amy, I'm glad you read it all









Still freaks me out that it happened, period tho.

Now I'm really going to bed.


----------



## mahdokht (Dec 2, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by simonee_
*

Oh, there wouldn't be any of that aggressive proselytizing involved. That bugs me, you know ~ every time I see a Muslima in hijab, she tries to force me to become a Muslim myself. And a terrorist, too.







:

*
Yeah.... Here is a response I wrote excerpted from a longer article:

Muhajabat: Muslim Borg

According to French President Jacques Chirac, hijab is an aggressive and ostentatious sign of religious proselytism. Those few inches of chiffon, silk, cotton, or polyester, if you please, are a threat to the secular state. Haven't you heard the story of unwitting non-Muslims, affirmed supporters of a secular state, innocently strolling down the street only to be attacked by the hijab? The power of seeing a woman veiled instantly transforms the peace and freedom loving Frenchmen into a violent, angry, foaming at the mouth murderer intent on dismantling democracy in the name of Islam. If the intended victim is particularly stubborn, the hijab has a failsafe method to insure submission. The scarf leaps from the woman's head, traveling faster than a speeding bullet. It wounds itself into a keen-edged sword and points menacingly at the neck of the victim. If, by some miraculous and powerful dedication to French secularism, the victim still resists conversion to "militant Islam" the hijab sword promptly chops off their head and vaporizes their remains. Yes, for the French a woman in hijab is much like Star Trek's Borg, resistance is futile.


----------



## Marlena (Jul 19, 2002)

Quote:

That's it damn it! From now on my croissant will have a little extra bread in the shape of a star and im callin em islamicrecents. Forget liberty fries I'm gonna cook 'em with the skins and call em hijabi fries!
:LOL

But on a more serious note, particularly given the obscene election results involving Jean Marie Le Pen last year, this likely indicates that French popular sentiment against Arabs and those from the Maghreb is increasing even further than in the past. If France continues in an extremist direction, it may turn into a tinderbox, given its significant Arab and Maghrebi population.


----------



## merpk (Dec 19, 2001)

Yes, France is a mess. Now it's time for me to gloat, with all these mamas who were all ready to name their kids after Mr. Chirac when he made his stand against the impending war ...

Okay, okay, I'll stop.

But seriously, those coutoure designers are part of the problem. Sonia Rykiel and I'm sure others signed the petition supporting Chirac's view.

You know, the claim is that France is adamantly secular, and that's why this is happening. So why are only large crosses disallowed, but cute little ones are okay? Why is Christmas a national holiday? And how come school is not held on Sunday? Seven days a week, come on. If they want to truly have a secular week, make the weekend/day off on Monday. Don't think any religion has a claim on Monday, except Orthodox CallInSickers.

:sigh


----------



## RowansDad (Mar 27, 2002)

In case you missed it:
French MPs back headscarf ban
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3474673.stm


----------



## inorbit (Feb 11, 2004)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Marlena_
*:LOL

But on a more serious note, particularly given the obscene election results involving Jean Marie Le Pen last year, this likely indicates that French popular sentiment against Arabs and those from the Maghreb is increasing even further than in the past. If France continues in an extremist direction, it may turn into a tinderbox, given its significant Arab and Maghrebi population.*
The spectacle of racial prejudice is an ugly thing. No one wants to see the rights of a minority trampled by the majority. Tis the land of liberte and egalite, after all.

On the other hand, rights are always conditional. No group has completely unfettered conduct; the law applies to all, etc.

In which case, it is probably a good idea to consider, exactly, WHY this very radical step being taken by the French government.

Actually, you already know. You used the word "tinderbox."

This radical step is being taken to reaffirm the notion that France is a secular society. They think that they should do this to oppose theocratic religious extremists, who have become very powerful at this time in history.

There is really nothing that free governments can due to stop religious terrorism, but it is incumbent on secular states to promulgate their ideologies in the face of the fascism that prevails when religious zealots get their way.

And when I say "their," I mean "our" ideologies -- the pluralistic, multicultural, progressive societies of the West, where human rights are generally respected.

From this vantage, groups which seek to establish homogenous, arbitrary, sectarian dominions should be opposed.

Aside from the obvious Taliban example, consider the treatment of Sikhs by Hindi extremists in the wake of Indira Gandhi's assassination, terrorist actions by the Khalistan Defence Force, or the oppression of the Bahai by Shi'ite Iran.

By censoring Christian crosses and so forth, I would agree that the French government is being heavy handed. But how can these things be spoken of openly? The tinderbox would be set off!


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by inorbit_
*

This radical step is being taken to reaffirm the notion that France is a secular society. They think that they should do this to oppose theocratic religious extremists, who have become very powerful at this time in history.

There is really nothing that free governments can due to stop religious terrorism, but it is incumbent on secular states to promulgate their ideologies in the face of the fascism that prevails when religious zealots get their way.
*
This is what the French supporters of this measure believe. But I, as a member of a religious minority whose right to free expression of religion is protected by the US Bill of Rights, do not agree with this logic. It is a basic human right of individuals to choose their religious beliefs.

This is not the promulgation of secular ideology, it is discrimination against religious minorities. No one is fooled by the "small crucifix" part of this. But say it does function to protect secularism. Is secularism a higher value to French republicans (small r) than liberty and equality? I don't see "secularisme" in the big three there.

France's colonial policies of the last two centuries have come back to bite them on the derriere. That doesn't mean it makes sense for the French to take out their fear of the Muslim minority on the heads of teenage girls.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

all these mamas who were all ready to name their kids after Mr. Chirac when he made his stand against the impending war ...








:







: I must have missed those posts. And I surely don't remember any new babes with his name







:

sounds like one of those assumptions that if you agree with one thing a politico supports you automatically support everything he does. I thought most of us were critical enough thinkers to have moved past that concept. Or maybe not.


----------



## sadean (Nov 20, 2001)

Quote:

If they want to truly have a secular week, make the weekend/day off on Monday. Don't think any religion has a claim on Monday, except Orthodox CallInSickers.








T
Actually many Hindus in India take Monday off as their "day of rest" as it were...most of the retail stores close that day...Maybe Tuesday? :LOL


----------



## CanOBeans (Apr 7, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by merpk_
*You know, the claim is that France is adamantly secular, and that's why this is happening. So why are only large crosses disallowed, but cute little ones are okay? Why is Christmas a national holiday? And how come school is not held on Sunday? Seven days a week, come on. If they want to truly have a secular week, make the weekend/day off on Monday. Don't think any religion has a claim on Monday, except Orthodox CallInSickers.

:sigh*
For starters, many businesses here ARE closed on Mondays. And I believe there is a proposition to designate a Jewish and Muslim holiday "day off" in addition to Christmas. I think France aspires to being as secular as possible, but is having some growing pains right now.

It WAS pretty ironic to hear all this hoopla over keeping ostentatious demonstrations of religion out of the schools at the same time that my kids were decorating trees and singing Christmas songs...at school.







Admittedly, I didn't see any aspects of the Christian version of Christmas, only secular things like trees and Santa, etc. Whatever.

I personally do not get it. I don't agree with what they are doing, and I don't understand it. One friend of mine says that the girls who are wearing hijab are being forced to by their families -- that they would prefer not to. Don't shoot me for saying that, I'm just passing on the opinion/understanding of one French person! :LOL I know the French are highly conscious of maintaining their French culture, and I'm sure that the influx of immigrants of other cultures feels threatening to that. At the same time, as someone else mentioned above, they are reaping what they sowed from colonization.

Anyway, I very much LIKE the fact that France is (or tries to be) a secular state -- although with pockets of hypocrisy, or paradox, or what have you. I think states should be secular -- I will say that there is FAR less religion in France's government than in that of the land of separation of church and state.

It's kind of funny to see all these grand churches around town and to read that the French are 90% Catholic, but then find out that they don't go to the churches and generally don't practice much faith. Or to read in the paper about a town where a new Catholic high school is being built, which will teach the state curriculum with a small amount of religion and be partially funded by the state, while the mayor of said town is simultaneously expressing his fear that the one Muslim high school in France might be (oh, horror) teaching from the Islamic faith.







:

Sorry to have rambled. Just thought I would share -- and make the point that just because I have supported France's actions or have praised certain things French in the past doesn't mean I can't see its warts. No little baby Chiracs running around here, even though I supported his government's stance on the war.


----------



## hotmamacita (Sep 25, 2002)

Aggressive? Wait, am I missing something? What is aggressive about hijab? Oh, please. Aggressive?









So, let me see...they either dishonor their parents and religion or they do not get educated?


----------



## Annoia (Nov 16, 2003)

Quote:

One friend of mine says that the girls who are wearing hijab are being forced to by their families -- that they would prefer not to.
I'm sure there are girls/women who are forced by their families. But out of all the muslim women I know, both in the US and Europe, not one was forced to wear hijeb. I think the idea that muslim women are forced to wear the hijeb is an outdated stereotype. Sure, it happens. But not enough to warrent a law banning the hijeb , IMHO.

Whether you force a woman to wear the hijeb or force her to take it off, it doen't matter. Either way you are disrespecting women's right to choose.

Besides, passing a law against hijeb does not help those girls in authoritarian families. Obviousely if a girl is being forced to do something against her will, the problem goes far deeper than the outward display of piety. Taking the hijeb off her head does nothing to alter the disfunctional family dynamics - and may even make her situation worse.

It's kinda like the drug laws in the US. Where I am, you have to be over 18 to buy spray paint or air freshner. Why? Because the gov't is worried about kids huffing them. Does that make any sense? Not to me. It does nothing to either help us understand or solve the basic problem - why do kids want to huff stuff?

Well, I've subjected ya'll to enough of my ramblings...


----------



## inorbit (Feb 11, 2004)

Of course, religious practice is the most delicate of topics. Still, some good can come of discussing them, perhaps demystifying activities or at least exchanging viewpoints.

The headscarf and the hijab are not offensive in and of themselves.

The problem from the Western, liberal perspective is what they are for. They are garments of modesty. They are worn in order to protect women from male lust. So as not to inflame men, women must veil themselves.

In Western thought, it is the male who should control his own lust, regardless of what the woman is wearing. If a woman dresses scantily, that's not an invitation to rape. To us Western thinkers, hijab is like chastity belts -- a relic of female oppression.

Would unveiling the woman shame her in the eyes of her conservative relatives? Probably, yes. But if it is the state that demands this, then (I presume the thinking goes), no shame should attach to her -- she is just doing what the country requires.

It is a sort of forced integration of a tight conservative society into the mainstream.

Forced assimilation has a very bad history, of course. One thinks of Aboriginal children being forced to give up their language and culture. On the other hand, so does non-assimilation.


----------



## mahdokht (Dec 2, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by inorbit_
*Of course, religious practice is the most delicate of topics. Still, some good can come of discussing them, perhaps demystifying activities or at least exchanging viewpoints.

The headscarf and the hijab are not offensive in and of themselves.

The problem from the Western, liberal perspective is what they are for. They are garments of modesty. They are worn in order to protect women from male lust. So as not to inflame men, women must veil themselves.

In Western thought, it is the male who should control his own lust, regardless of what the woman is wearing. If a woman dresses scantily, that's not an invitation to rape. To us Western thinkers, hijab is like chastity belts -- a relic of female oppression.

Would unveiling the woman shame her in the eyes of her conservative relatives? Probably, yes. But if it is the state that demands this, then (I presume the thinking goes), no shame should attach to her -- she is just doing what the country requires.

It is a sort of forced integration of a tight conservative society into the mainstream.

Forced assimilation has a very bad history, of course. One thinks of Aboriginal children being forced to give up their language and culture. On the other hand, so does non-assimilation.*
so much to be addressed here.

a) Hijab is not only about protecting women from male lust. It is about identifying Muslim women as Muslim women. It is a part of a system of modest dress and decorum for men and women that are about each sex getting a better grip on their own lust. It is about obeying the laws of God, regardless of the reasons man comes up with.

b) I am an American woman who wears hijab. I had no family to pressure me, I converted at 13 and began wearing hijab at 16, I know several other women who acted similarly. I am vocal and active in support of causes that are close to my heart. I am vocal about them in my home, at my mosque, on the internet, in the streets and to my elected officials. I also vote. I am one of millions. I have also worked and paid taxes. Tell me, exactly how have I failed to assimilate?

Being an active and productive member of society has little or nothing to do with what you wear and if a woman's dress is a threat to the state then it is the state that needs to change, not the woman.

If each country had a right/reason to be that concerned about assimilation then Americans should be forcing the Amish into SUVs. Actually we should shut down MDC too 'cause we have strayed far from the parenting and living models that are mainstream in America.


----------



## merpk (Dec 19, 2001)

Man, mahdokht, that was _good_.


----------



## inorbit (Feb 11, 2004)

There is a great deal about Islam that is foreign to the Western philosophical mindset -- I'd be interested in your thoughts about sharia, divorce (especially the automatic custody thing), polygamy, and women needing men's permission to travel. Thank you for your articulate reply...people like you, astride both cultures, can do so much to spread mutual understanding.


----------



## inorbit (Feb 11, 2004)

One thing though -- I do not think that hijab is a threat to the state. I do see it as France's attempt to subvert Islamic culture, not necessarily because of its fear of terrorism (although Algerian bomb-throwers must be near the top of internal security concerns).

My point is that the modern state has not only the right, but the duty to intervene in SOME sacred, deeply felt cultural traditions. For example, suttee, FGM...etc. I'm not saying that hijab is on par with FGM or suttee. But the Western "equality of the sexes" mindset is incompatible with some features of Islamism and that is why, I think, the state is banning headscarfs (and crosses, in a not-very-convincing distraction).


----------



## mahdokht (Dec 2, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by inorbit_
*There is a great deal about Islam that is foreign to the Western philosophical mindset -- I'd be interested in your thoughts about sharia, divorce (especially the automatic custody thing), polygamy, and women needing men's permission to travel. Thank you for your articulate reply...people like you, astride both cultures, can do so much to spread mutual understanding.*
Greetings,

I'd like to reply to these things, quickly, but this is not the place. If you have questions about Women In Islam, then they should be in the Spritituality Forum. Let me note that Spirituality is a place for respectful discussion and not derision or debate. You have been very respectful in your questions, but I just wanted to note that.

Quickly-
Actually, there is very little about Islam that is foreign to Western culture. Interestingly enough, the earliest "western" complaints about Islamic culture was that it was entirely too liberal with its women. Ironic isn't it? Racist and Islamophobic stereotypes can be traced all the way back to Chaucer.

A) Shari'a is Islamic law, it is derived from the qur'an and the sunnah of the prophet. I think its wonderful, I follow it. For more detail let's head over to Spirituality. You start a thread and I will gladly answer.

B) Divorce. I'm glad its available and thrilled that I haven't needed it. I have power of attorney written in my marriage contract, I can divorce my husband at any time just as he can divorce me at any time. For more detail let's head over to Spirituality. You start a thread and I will gladly answer.

C) Polygyny- People should be able to marry who they please. I know several well educated, active and secure women involved in polygynous marriages. I might even consider it if the women, time and place were right. For more detail let's head over to Spirituality. You start a thread and I will gladly answer.

D) Women don't need their husband's permission to travel. For more detail let's head over to Spirituality. You start a thread and I will gladly answer.


----------



## TexasSuz (Mar 4, 2002)

France's ruling makes me sick uke. What is oppressive is not allowing people to practice their religious beliefs. They are telling people that it is okay to be religious in your homes but to leave it at home! I read that French officials said they wanted to protect their "civil, secular society." How civil is it to not allow people to practice what they believe?

Yes, there must be some limits if a person wants to harm others but in this case we are talking about clothing!

Hopefully this could never happen in the USA because of our free exercise clause in the Constitiution. I feel that free exercise of religion is a basic human right. I wish all countires felt that way and that the UN encouraged free exercise of ALL religions in ALL countires.

I went to a public high school and had a Muslim friend who left class every Friday to attend Friday prayers. We were only allowed to miss class 10 times but he was given an exemption based on religious practice. Likewise, Christians were allowed to miss classes on Good Friday. This is free exercise at its best!

Just my thoughts. Hopefully all the religious groups in France are getting together to fight this unfair ruling! What can we do to help?


----------



## inorbit (Feb 11, 2004)

I'm not planning to "debate," I am very happy that Islam is working well for you.


----------



## DaryLLL (Aug 12, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by CanOBeans_
*It WAS pretty ironic to hear all this hoopla over keeping ostentatious demonstrations of religion out of the schools at the same time that my kids were decorating trees and singing Christmas songs...at school.







Admittedly, I didn't see any aspects of the Christian version of Christmas, only secular things like trees and Santa, etc. Whatever.*
Off topic and left in the dust of the last page, but how far do we go on this secularism thing? Decorated evergreens and Santa (thinly disguised Holly King) are in no way secular. They are northern pagan religious symbols.

When a couple has a mixed faith marriage and the Jewish spouse objects to the Christian partner's desire for a "Xmas tree," do _either_ of them realize it is a pagan symbol?

Should we ban lighted trees, wreaths, roping, and holly, "Santa and his reindeer" on town squaresand streets along with menorahs and nativity scenes during the solstice? I find it richly ironic there is hoopla over Xtian and Jewish and Muslim symbols of faith, but nearly everyone has conveniently forgotten the meaning behind the traditional "Christmas" tree. Even *Sun*day as the Christian day of rest? Constantine's "pagan" Solar God's holy day.

Maybe paganism (honoring the wheel of the year) _is_ the True Religion. It has a way of asserting itself sort of under the radar. :LOL

Groundhog Day.
Easter.
May Day and Mother's Day.
Midsummer (school's out!).
Halloween.
Etc.


----------



## barbara (Feb 13, 2002)

Quote:

how far do we go on this secularism thing?
Good question Darylll!

I'm outraged at France's ruling concerning headcoverings, but hardly surprised. Secularism seems to be the wave of the future. The trend seems to be againest anything outwardly religious. I wouldn't be too quick to get pagan symbols acknowledged or we shall find them banned in due course also! Perhaps the hidden/assimulation of pagan holidays/rituals has been the key to it's survival through the ages!


----------

