Miss Kolka

producing her own life

<< ... | Aurevoir..mais pas Adieu! About Burqas, Sarkozy and all that | Popularity! >>

Aurevoir..mais pas Adieu! About Burqas, Sarkozy and all that | 22 juin 2009

Thought I should blog today since I wont be able to do so again before at least ten days. We're moving in less that two weeks and the Internet is going to be cut off tomorrow..Oh my.. what will I do with myself? No Google, no news, no facebook, no email. Its going to be weird.

And since its probably my last blog living in France (how dramatic) I thought as should go back to my criticism of french politics,which could not be more fitting.

Today is the day an unusal thing happens. The French president will speak in front of the whole Congress (Hard to say what it is really in english terms "Congrés" could also mean parliament including senate?) at Versailles. This has not happened in 150 years and is apparently bothering many. The opposition has been debating for over a week whether to attend or not (don't they have better things to do than to argue about THAT for many days??) and the result is that the small parties to the left such as the green party are not coming while the Socialist party (PS) has decided to listen to the speech of Nicolas Sarkozy but boycott the debate afterwards. WHAT? WHY? It just sounds ridiculus. And I doubt the french public will understand that move. Don't we live in a democracy with free speech where debate is the underlining of understanding and information? Not asking questions and being "lectured" to by the President, like many MPs view this excercise, is just plain stupid. Trust the PS to make a move like this. I am profoundly disappointed and I have to say that the president wanting to address parliamentaries is not so shocking to me. Especially not in times like these, where the government is cutting big time on public spending, thinking of raising retirement age and laying off many jobs in the public sector. It needs to be explained and debated BETWEEN parties. What is the point if you have no opposition? Can you really call it a debate if you are only talking to yourself?

Another debate in the "Hemisphere" as they call it, is a new proposition by the right to ban burqas in France. Burqas are the blue draps that women wear mainly in afghanistan and Pakistan, which hide all of the body and even the eyes. A similar outfit is the "Niqab", a black whole-body weil that also hides the eyes, mainly wore in Saudi Arabia. This ban would also apply to that one.

I know these outfits can send strong signals to non-muslims and I've even witnessed my mother's reaction when we have (occasionally) seen "black widows", covered from top to toe on the Champs Elysées. People can have their opinions about it, nonetheless it is a religious symbol important to many. It is debatable whether women wear it to get peace in their own community, by their own accord or because of pressure by family members. The reality is that burkas and niqabs are worn. But are they so common in France that a law is needed?

Now, the reasoning behind this ban, according to MP Jacques Myard, is that in secular France there is no tradition of weiling women (although arguably, some very religious catholic women used to wear a weil some hundred years ago) and it is important to ban burqas and niqabs in the name of adaptation of muslim communities into the society. Also somewhere in there is mentioned that by french law women are equal to men so since these outfits connote the submission of women it is illegal. (it did not change the fact that this MP is question felt the need on a France5 show to declare that he did not find the wail ugly, and that many women were very attractive wearing the weil! how is that of any importance?What about equal pay?). Also if we are going into this direction, why should jews be allowed to wear their hats and long hair, catholic women wear those awful cardigans and goths black hair?

I was very intrigued by this show and watched it all on a friday night, long into my sleeping hours. Especially did I admire the logic of the journalist Caroline Fourest who made very sensible points time and again. She said that this law could make sense but from a whole other perspective. The choice of security and safety. The fact is that the burqa and niqab hide the person completely so it is hard to know what woman (if it is indeed a woman) is hiding under there. (this technique has often been used by fugitives in explosive situations). In the security obsessed world we live in, burqas work against the identification process we need to feel safe and should not be tolerated in public spaces (you would not feel comfortable with a doctor wearing a burqa, but its a bit ridiculous because those who do wear it certainly do not work outside the home). By that standpoint the law could make sense.

But this has to be seen in another context. A law against "religious symbols" was applied 5 years ago in France. It banned any religous symbols such as a BIG crucifix, a veil or a turban in public schools. In reality it was meant mainly to ban the muslim veil since it is said in the text that only "big obvious religous signs that are ment to make visible a political standpoint" are banned. It caused outrage here in France, many organisations saw it as xenophobic and France even got threats from extremist groups for attacks on french soil. (not sure if any have been linked to that directly though).

So this new law begs the question: is it really necessary to introduce a new law, against outfits that are not so common, that could only become a trigger for more hostility towards french citizens? Shouldn't security concerns be more important than to reach a few people who perhaps don't even have a choice and would have to identify themselves anyway WITHOUT the burka or niqab where it is necessary? (Like is asked in the rare cases when people wed at townhall and have to take off the burqa?) It does not appear to me to be such a huge problem and it will not automatically induce more respect for women. You don't have to be muslim to be sexist. Most muslims aren't. Plus, the sexist men I have ever met were all atheist!

That's all folks! Read you in Copenhagen!

Publié par Kolka à 13:19:11 dans Miss Kolka | Commentaires (0) | Permaliens