Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
It's Creepy, So Ban It
Could British niqabs be going the way of the French headscarves? A New York Times article suggests as much:
There have been numerous examples in the past year. A lawyer dressed in a niqab was told by an immigration judge that she could not represent a client because, he said, he could not hear her. A teacher wearing a niqab was dismissed from her school. A student who was barred from wearing a niqab took her case to the courts, and lost. In reaction, the British educational authorities are proposing a ban on the niqab in schools altogether. …
David Sexton, a columnist for The Evening Standard, wrote recently that the niqab was an affront and that Britain had been "too deferential."
"It says that all men are such brutes that if exposed to any more normally clothed women, they cannot be trusted to behave — and that all women who dress any more scantily like that are indecent," Mr. Sexton wrote. "It's abusive, a walking rejection of all our freedoms."
I can see why people find a full-face covering unnerving even if they don't support a legislative solution, but maybe we should be wary of assuming that all hijab or niqab-wearing individuals are hapless victims of self-delusion or misogynist oppression. Only a fraction of British Muslims wear them, after all, and the custom is no longer limited just to older, foreign-born women.
Nick Gillespie discusses Salman Rushdie on veils here.
|6.22.07 @ 2:45PM|#
"I can see why people find a full-face covering unnerving even
if they don't support a legislative solution, but maybe we should
be wary of assuming that all hijab or niqab-wearing individuals are
hapless victims of self-delusion or misogynist oppression."
Because it couldn't possibly be true that some people think
dressing modestly is in good taste ... as long as the anti-modesty
police are gearing up, let's require, under the threat of
imprisonment or fines, that every woman in warm climes must wear
bikinis to force her to prove she's not repressed by a
paternalistic culture that orders her around.
VM|6.22.07 @ 2:48PM|#
Do you think there's a huge temptation to make faces at other
people when bedecked?
But creepy and icky certainly are two headings for people's desire
to ban things....
stephen the goldberger|6.22.07 @ 2:48PM|#
The niqab has long been a tool of maternalistic oppression. A means to enable ugly women to stand on the same social ground as hot bitties.
Urkobold™|6.22.07 @ 2:49PM|#
[L]et's require, under the threat of imprisonment or fines, that every woman
in warm climesmust wear bikinis to force her to prove she's not repressed by a paternalistic culture that orders her around.
THE URKOBOLD THINKS YOUR IDEA IS MAMMARIFIC!
brian|6.22.07 @ 2:49PM|#
"It's abusive, a walking rejection of all our
freedoms."
Oh yes, and the only solution to people's rejection of
our freedoms is by taking away
theirs. That'll show 'em!
let's require, under the threat of imprisonment or fines, that
every woman in warm climes must wear bikinis to force her to prove
she's not repressed by a paternalistic culture that orders her
around.
I'm usually a libertarian, but this sounds like a pretty appealing
idea, actually...
|6.22.07 @ 2:50PM|#
Hey, the niqab drives me to near uncontrollable sexual frenzy. Those women are just trying to tease me. Seductive tarts, I say. Immoral, loose seductive tarts.
|6.22.07 @ 2:51PM|#
I gotta admit, I find those things creepy, but I'm not
ethno-centric enough to think that my own culturally-conditioned
reaction to them is universal.
Salman Rushdie has a great line about niqabs that "move with every
shift of the eyes." You and I may see them as stripping women of
their individuality and expression, but I'm not so sure that the
people brought up and in those societies agree.
VM|6.22.07 @ 2:51PM|#
also a reason for institutions etc to fear things (sex, female empowerment, women in leadership positions, etc)
|6.22.07 @ 3:05PM|#
Aren't we only talking about 4 or 500 people in the whole of the country? Do we really need a law for that small amount of people -- why not ban yobs wearing hoodies?
|6.22.07 @ 3:05PM|#
let's require, under the threat of imprisonment or fines,
that every woman in warm climes must wear bikinis to force her to
prove she's not repressed by a paternalistic culture that orders
her around.
I propose an exemption for fat chicks.
|6.22.07 @ 3:08PM|#
New York's courts ruled that women have the right to go topless.
If congress insists on extending our authority internationally with
the gambling ban, why not go whole hog? Imagine JFK and La Guardia
officers enforcing a global ban on shirts and bras.
I'll take freedom of religion over freedom from religion any
day.
|6.22.07 @ 3:10PM|#
...be careful. -- people in masks cannot be trusted.
Fezzik
I'm with JsD. Those things just leave everything up to the
imagination. We're talking MY imagination here folks. Along the
lines of what StG wrote, it makes all women into
uberhot-bitties.
jh,
The Amish dress modestly. This dress code is extreme. It signifies
fanatic cult membership.
Standard libertarian disclaimers about allowing self loathing
people to express their self loathingness in their style of
dress.
VM|6.22.07 @ 3:11PM|#
Warren -
gotta love Princess Bride references! Chucklehead has an awesome
use of PB below!
*ambles off
|6.22.07 @ 3:17PM|#
Of course women should be free to wear em, but I don't like em. All I can think of is that the elephant man is under there. Or one of those fleshy mutants from Beneath the Planet of the Apes.
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 3:24PM|#
I could actually see a (non-private and all other libertarian disclaimers) school telling teachers they are not allowed to do their jobs with only their eyes visible. I'm also wondering: aren't there already laws saying adults can't mask their faces in public?
|6.22.07 @ 3:29PM|#
This thread seems as good of a place to post this observation as
anywhere. One of the real beautiful things about H&R posters is
that there are NO sacred cows. Y'all are a bunch of equal
opportunity, cutthroat bastards. Bring up puppies and someone says
gator food. No wonder Libertarians aren't popular. Everybodys most
cherished, most deeply felt beliefs have been lampooned here. And
damn, do we pile on if it's funny. Therefore I humbly submit for
your consideration -
J sub D's proposal for a Libertarian motto:
We Offend Everyone.
|6.22.07 @ 3:32PM|#
I'm also wondering: aren't there already laws saying adults
can't mask their faces in public?
In lots of jurisdictions. It's an anti-crime measure. I don't know
how effective it is, though. I suspect nobody does.
Just sayin\'|6.22.07 @ 3:39PM|#
Only a fraction of British Muslims wear them
That fraction could be 4/5ths or 5/5ths. For a magazine called
Reason...
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 3:39PM|#
Of course women should be free to wear em, but I don't like
em.
Just to play devil's advocate (I'm not sure where I stand on this
issue), this so far doesn't sound like a legal issue so much as a
dress-code issue. Women should be free to wear bikinis, yes, but if
a female lawyer wore one in court the judge would likely throw her
out for not meeting the dress code. Same for a teacher wearing a
bikini to school.
Saying women can't wear face coverings while working in a courtroom
or classroom doesn't strike me as any worse than saying they can't
wear bikinis in these contexts.
|6.22.07 @ 3:42PM|#
"A lawyer dressed in a niqab was told by an immigration judge
that she could not represent a client because, he said, he could
not hear her."
This is actually plausible. Many hearing-impaired people rely on
lip-reading, sometimes unconsciously, to understand speech. Why do
muslim fundamentalists hate the hearing impaired?
"[A]ren't there already laws saying adults can't mask their faces
in public?"
Yes, in some places (ie, Virginia), but it is unclear whether this
would withstand a First Amendment-based court challenge.
Does anyone remember the case of the female muslim NYC bus driver
who wanted to wear a face covering to work, and how that was
resolved?
VM|6.22.07 @ 3:52PM|#
Big Mo -
I think her buddies fixed it so the cloth got caught in the bus
door one day - they closed the door right before she got on and
vroom!
Which is actually amazing, because they tried repeatedly (and
failed) to get it caught in the elevator door.
That one day when they rigged up the escalator.. man. that was
really hilarious.
|6.22.07 @ 3:54PM|#
Do you think there's a huge temptation to make faces at other
people when bedecked?
YES!!! YES!!! YES!!!! it's one of the most fun things I get to do
when riding my motorcycle, making faces at people as I pass
them.
and yes, I do have the sense of humor of a 10 year old boy.
Lord Duppy|6.22.07 @ 3:55PM|#
The clothing you have chosen for yourself is an affront to freedom! Priceless.
thoreau|6.22.07 @ 3:59PM|#
Reading the article, I get the impression that it's an identity
issue as much as a modesty issue for some of the women who wear it.
Some of them said that they even got a certain satisfaction from
people noticing and commenting on it.
Sometimes, she said, she gets a kick out of the mocking.
" 'All right gorgeous,' " she said she had heard men say as she walked along the street. "I feel empowered," she said. "They'd like to see, and they can't."
Or:
The niqab, to her, is about identity. "If I dressed in a Western way I could be a Hindu, I could be anything," she said. "This way I feel comfortable in my identity as a Muslim woman."
If everybody makes a point of pretending not to notice the niqab,
burka, chador, and whatever else, my guess is that the thing will
sort itself out in a generation. Western civilization survived 70's
attire, and we can survive this too. The women already wearing it
might continue, but the young women hoping to send the "Look at me!
Oh, you can't! Denied! Yep, that's me! I'm different!" message will
be disappointed.
|6.22.07 @ 4:02PM|#
I'd bet that the more the government tries to demonize the
wearers of such attire, the more convinced the "devout" will become
that it is the right thing to do, and its popularity will
spread.
All these Middle Eastern derived crazies like to think they are
being horribly persecuted by evil secular governments--just look at
the nutty Christers in our own midst. They actually think they have
it rough in the contemporary US of A.
D.A. Ridgely|6.22.07 @ 4:05PM|#
She's creepy and she's kooky,
Mysterious and spooky,
She's altogether ooky,
The niqābed attorney!
Her face is quite the mystery,
For people trying to see,
They only view upholstery,
The niqābed attorney!
Da da da da... Veiled!
Da da da da... Haled!
Da da da da
Da da da da
Da da da da... Assailed!
So get a burqa on there,
It's really nifty to wear
And give the judge a big scare,
The niqābed attorney!
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 4:05PM|#
The niqab, to her, is about identity. "If I dressed in a
Western way I could be a Hindu, I could be anything," she said.
"This way I feel comfortable in my identity as a Muslim
woman."
Except by choosing the most extreme form of Muslim dress she comes
out sounding more like an attention whore. She could have chosen
the garment which leaves the face visible, or even chosen modest
Western dress with a headscarf, but instead she chooses the
"EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME!" option and then calls it modesty.
thoreau|6.22.07 @ 4:08PM|#
She could have chosen the garment which leaves the face
visible, or even chosen modest Western dress with a headscarf, but
instead she chooses the "EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME!" option and then
calls it modesty.
Hypothesis:
Woman in article:reality TV contestants::Freegans:airfare
obsessives
She may say it's about religion, and reality TV contestants may say
they want to be the next unimpressive Trump employee, but it's all
about getting the attention. Likewise, freegans may say it's about
rejecting consumer culture, and airfare obsessives may say it's
about going on more vacations or something, but it's all about
finding the deal.
|6.22.07 @ 4:09PM|#
"Except by choosing the most extreme form of Muslim dress she
comes out sounding more like an attention whore. She could have
chosen the garment which leaves the face visible, or even chosen
modest Western dress with a headscarf, but instead she chooses the
"EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME!" option and then calls it modesty."
I this makes her different from women generally how?
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 4:12PM|#
Hypothesis: Woman in article:reality TV
contestants::Freegans:airfare obsessives
She may say it's about religion, and reality TV contestants may
say they want to be the next unimpressive Trump employee, but it's
all about getting the attention.
Makes sense to me. It's pretty ironic, though; the whole point of
Muslim dress is supposed to be to make the wearer modest and
unassuming and (basically) invisible. Yet these women are wearing
them in contexts guaranteed to draw plenty of attention to
themselves, far more attention than they'd get in Western clothes.
May as well wear a business suit to a nudist camp.
|6.22.07 @ 4:14PM|#
Well, I wasn't referring to Jennifer personally, but the idea that many women dress for attention that they later disclaim is not exactly novel, nor limited in application to crazy Muslim women.
|6.22.07 @ 4:15PM|#
Then there was the case of the woman in Florida who wanted to be
pictured in the niqab for her Driver's license picture....quite a
few commentators pointed out that if she were in her native Saudi
Arabia she wouldn't even be allowed to drive, so shaddup and show
your face already.
Any woman should have the right to wear a niqab if she so desires.
But she then has to take the consequences of this. We are not a
culture that allows for anonyminity in covering up our faces in
daily life. The freedom to wear a niqab will be a freedom only
until bank robbers and other criminals realize exactly how great a
disguise this is and a niqab is used in several bank robberies,
shootouts, and other similar activity.
At which point, security forces and police will start to arrest--or
shoot--niqab-wearing individuals on suspicion alone. Women who
insist on wearing the niqab will have to balance their "privacy"
against the possibility of getting shot.
I predict a heck of a lot of them will suddenly decide that maybe
showing their faces isn't as much of a sin as they thought it
was.
End of problem.
thoreau|6.22.07 @ 4:16PM|#
Jennifer-
Didn't you once point out a company selling "Christian" swimwear? I
remember somebody observing that the stuff is so unusual-looking
that it calls all sorts of attention to the wearer, while a simple,
traditional one-piece would have covered lots of skin and avoided
attention?
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 4:18PM|#
Didn't you once point out a company selling "Christian"
swimwear? I remember somebody observing that the stuff is so
unusual-looking that it calls all sorts of attention to the wearer,
while a simple, traditional one-piece would have covered lots of
skin and avoided attention?
Yeah, I posted a link to the company, which I think was called
"Wholesome Wear," and I may well have been the one pointing out how
much more attention you'd get on the beach in such a suit than in a
standard one-piece.
|6.22.07 @ 4:18PM|#
If we know criminals will try to take advantage of such
disguising garb, can't we just start shooting those wear it now,
preemptively?
The Bush Doctrine, individualized.
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 4:29PM|#
Here's the
thread, Thoreau! And it was me who made the immodest
modesty observation.
|6.22.07 @ 4:43PM|#
Irony on display,
Whomever you may be, I raise a glass in your honor. A touch, a
touch, I do confess.
|6.22.07 @ 5:07PM|#
They say the President's dead but no one can find his head
It's been missing now for weeks
But no one noticed it he had seemed so fit
and I'm Sick of it
I'm Sick of You, I'm so Sick of You, bye, bye, bye
bye, bye, bye
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 5:24PM|#
True, Warren, but you never said anything about raising an "unbroken literal" glass.
|6.22.07 @ 5:28PM|#
The freedom to wear a nun's habit will be a freedom only until
bank robbers and other criminals realize exactly how great a
disguise this is and a nun's habit is used in several bank
robberies, shootouts, and other similar activity.
At which point, security forces and police will start to arrest--or
shoot--nun's habit-wearing individuals on suspicion alone. Women
who insist on wearing the nun's habit will have to balance their
"privacy" against the possibility of getting shot.
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 5:29PM|#
Joseph Dietrich, nuns' habits don't obscure their faces. The niqab does.
|6.22.07 @ 5:34PM|#
Jennifer,
"the whole point of Muslim dress is supposed to be to make the
wearer modest and unassuming and (basically) invisible"
Whose whole point? As you point out, it's certainly not the
point of the woman they interviewed. Frankly, even the men who
insist that their wives and daughters dress like that aren't
looking for them to appear "invisible," but to appear Muslim, even
to stand out as Muslim.
Did you know that the traditional nun's outfit - the habit and robe
et al - was originally designed to be a plain, modest version of
what women wore anyway? Now, it's not. It's worn for the specific
purpose of indicating that the wearer is different from most
women.
Symbols that a group adopt become primarily symbols of the group,
and lose their original meaning. It's certainly not unique to this
woman.
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 5:41PM|#
Point taken, Joe, I should have specified that "according to the
original religious idea, Muslim dress is supposed to make one
modest and etc."
If they want to be recognized as Muslims, good for them. Though
there are still many options available that don't fairly scream
"LOOK AT ME!" to passersby. Personally, I'm more impressed by those
who can be recognized for their ideas or intellect rather than
attire.
But to go back to one of my earlier points, wearing the niqab in
court or in a classroom is just as much a dress-code violation as
wearing a bikini would be. I have no sympathy for those women in
the article. (The women insulted when they walk on the street are
another matter, but there are rude catcallers in every
culture.)
Pointing out what we all know|6.22.07 @ 5:56PM|#
"Though there are still many options available that don't fairly
scream "LOOK AT ME!" to passersby."
Like what? Adopting a shrill, angry tone?
|6.22.07 @ 6:01PM|#
Volokh posted on this today:
http://www.volokh.com/posts/1182520101.shtml
It's a little more complicated than wearing Halloween costumes to
the grocery store.
I'll take freedom of religion over freedom from religion any
day.
Perhaps Muslims should be accorded every religious freedom which
they extend to everyone else.
|6.22.07 @ 6:08PM|#
Jennifer,
"If they want to be recognized as Muslims, good for them. Though
there are still many options available that don't fairly scream
"LOOK AT ME!" to passersby."
As I understand it, what counts as "Muslim" dress varies among
different Muslim societies. For women who grow up in a country that
defines a niqab as what Muslim women wear, wearing a Nancy
Pelosi/Condi Rice tasteful head scarf isn't really an option
available to them if they want to "dress Muslim."
"But to go back to one of my earlier points, wearing the niqab in
court or in a classroom is just as much a dress-code violation as
wearing a bikini would be." I hear you, but I give people a little
more lattitude when we're talking about religious practices. An
employer could insist that his Muslim employees only take the same
breaks as everyone else (you know, the standard 15 min at
mid-morning, 30 at lunch, and 15 in midafternoon) instead of
splitting his hour's worth of breaks to accomodate his prayer
schedule, but I'd say that employer is being a dick.
thoreau|6.22.07 @ 6:11PM|#
Perhaps Muslims should be accorded every religious freedom
which they extend to everyone else.
OK. The Bangladeshi guy in my lab never interferes with my
religious practices, so that should work out pretty well.
D.A. Ridgely|6.22.07 @ 6:30PM|#
BTW, don't British barristers still wear the robes and wigs? If so (and my little parody aside), wearing the niqab would be objectionable on different grounds; rather like coming to a Black & White Ball in a red dress. Then again, perhaps things are less formal in their immigration courts.
|6.22.07 @ 6:49PM|#
Didn't you once point out a company selling "Christian"
swimwear? I remember somebody observing that the stuff is so
unusual-looking that it calls all sorts of attention to the wearer,
while a simple, traditional one-piece would have covered lots of
skin and avoided attention?
I give you...
...the
Burquini!!
Jennifer|6.22.07 @ 8:55PM|#
I hear you, but I give people a little more lattitude when
we're talking about religious practices. An employer could insist
that his Muslim employees only take the same breaks as everyone
else (you know, the standard 15 min at mid-morning, 30 at lunch,
and 15 in midafternoon) instead of splitting his hour's worth of
breaks to accomodate his prayer schedule, but I'd say that employer
is being a dick.
But in your example, the hypothetical Muslim gets the same amount
of breaktime as everybody else. That's quite different from
completely suspending the standards to which everyone else is
expected to adhere. I stand 100 percent behind freedom of religion,
but not to the point where religion becomes an excuse for "I don't
have to follow the same rules as everybody else."
M|6.22.07 @ 9:23PM|#
I'd bet that the more the government tries to demonize the
wearers of such attire, the more convinced the "devout" will become
that it is the right thing to do, and its popularity will
spread.
I was told that in his attempt to modernize Turkey, Attaturk met
resistance from women who insisted on retaining the veil. His
solution was to permit veils for everyone and make it mandatory for
prostitutes. Result: no more veils.
Dunno if it's true; makes a good story, anyway.
|6.22.07 @ 10:07PM|#
Jennifer,
If you're accepting the premise I wrote - the Muslim guy gets to
have a different break schedule - you are accepting that he doesn't
have to follow the same rules as everyone else. You're allowing him
to follow a different rule, but making sure it's fair - he gets
neither favoritism nor punishment, but flexibility is shown within
that framework.
I think that's the principle here. How to actually apply it would
be a delicate, nuanced matter beyond what those of us who just read
about the issue can be expected to know.
|6.23.07 @ 2:06AM|#
OK. The Bangladeshi guy in my lab never interferes with my
religious practices, so that should work out pretty
well.
Ha, just wait till he's in the majority.
thoreau|6.23.07 @ 9:11AM|#
Ha, just wait till he's in the majority.
Let's see, my lab includes a hard-drinking Iranian, a Bangladeshi
who throws good parties only shows up to the mosque on holidays,
and an Algerian guy who has drinking stories about his time in
Paris.
Yes, I'm quaking in my boots at the prospect of a Muslim-majority
lab.
Well, the Iranian guy did have some bad things to say about
religion at one point, but he seems willing to forgive the fact
that I'm Catholic.
|6.23.07 @ 10:30AM|#
Let's see, my lab includes a hard-drinking Iranian, a
Bangladeshi who throws good parties only shows up to the mosque on
holidays, and an Algerian guy who has drinking stories about his
time in Paris.
Yes, I'm quaking in my boots at the prospect of a Muslim-majority
lab.
Well, the Iranian guy did have some bad things to say about
religion at one point, but he seems willing to forgive the fact
that I'm Catholic.
I have no problem with any drunk, lapsed Muslim with a PHD in
Physics.
If that was the criteria to get a Greed Card from a middle eastern
country, it would be good policy.
Its the other 99.9% that we need to worry about
thoreau|6.23.07 @ 10:33AM|#
Its the other 99.9% that we need to worry about
His son did try to take my juggling balls. Damn thief!
thoreau|6.23.07 @ 10:33AM|#
Oh, and one of his friends served in the US Army. I hear they teach those guys how to blow stuff up!
|6.23.07 @ 5:44PM|#
Um, Jennifer, nuns don't usually cover their faces so that only
their eyes are showing.
So your rewriting falls flat on its face anyway.
Whether Libertarians want to admit or not, we live in a culture
where people are expected to show their faces. People who haven't
shown their faces are people like bank robbers and other similar
entities. (Think of all the cliches in cartoons and movies about
the bank robbers drawing up to the bank with bandanas tied around
their faces.)
Because of this, I don't think that people in the US are ever going
to get used to seeing women wearing a niqab without thinking of
them as "other" and "hiding something."
If, after that, a crime is carried out where the niqab IS used to
hide the criminal's identity, the link between niqab and
someone-not-to-be-trusted will be even more reinforced. The police
may act in accordance with this belief.
highnumber|6.23.07 @ 8:50PM|#
Whether Libertarians want to admit or not, we live in a
culture where people are expected to...
That's where I tuned you out.
Jennifer|6.24.07 @ 10:23AM|#
Um, Jennifer, nuns don't usually cover their faces so that
only their eyes are showing. So your rewriting falls flat on its
face anyway.
I know. Go back and re-read the comments, and you'll see I made
exactly that point to Joseph Dietrich when he compared a nun's
habit to a niqab.
|6.25.07 @ 3:59PM|#
I dont know this website or who you people are, but laws in
France violate the rights of Muslims to wear hijabs and hiqabs if
they so choose. Perhaps it is not practical for some professions
like if you are in a court and maybe dangerous if you are around
machinery agreed, but a lot of my family wear hijabs and some older
wear the niqab and we dont interfere in your lives why does the
secular "free" government like France (also Turkiya) and maybe now
Engeltra want to interfere? Is your secular ideology so weak it
cannot stand up to a piece of cotton cloth made from a sheep?
And then finally to you Mr 'grand chalupa" I do not know if you are
joking or serious or partially joking maybe when you implying 99.9%
Muslims are some sort of threat to you... if you are joking then I
ask for your forgiveness in me taking issue and raising your name,
however if you are somewhat serios in this claim, then by your own
calculation I, a Muslim, most probably belong to this 99.9% and
thus be scared when opening your house door maybe it will be me
hiding in the bushes because I am coming after you!
And if no Muslims have come after you with a sword because of your
faith and you keep meeting only 0.1%, then you must be the luckiest
man alive that anyone knows, please tell me what is your secret to
this great luck I would like some of it too!
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245