That’s not your job, is it? Don’t you have other stuff to worry about – like the economic recession, climate change or unemployment levels? I know that you are worried about the reputation that French women have for beauty and glamour in the world, and you don’t want your lovelies to be covered up. However, since you are the global fashion capital, there are probably other more lucrative ways to solve the problem: perhaps a Chanel niqab, or a Louis Vuitton burqa with matching shoes and handbag?
You might think that change is bad, and moving France into the 21st century is a bad thing too – you know, with things like equality of rights and freedom. Oh, hold on. You guys are supposed to have that already aren’t you?
I understand your anxiety about giving women the right to make their own choices, and run their own lives, wear the clothes they want. It’s all a bit well, modern, isn’t it? And you can’t let Muslim women just get on with their lives exercising self-determination and autonomy, can you?
Actually, I’m wrong to say that you don’t like change – after all you altered the French constitution so that you could make the first ever presidential speech in the Palace of Versailles. Really pleased that you focused the historic occasion on women in veils. All 367 of them. You might want to take note of President Obama’s words – who’s a bit more popular than you: it’s up to Muslim women to decide what they wear.
So you’ve said that these poor women are oppressed and that the niqab is incompatible with French values. I imagine you and your mates must have been waiting for all those feminists and civil rights activists to stop banging on about the 40,000 French women who are violently abused by their partners every year, and the 1 in 3 that are raped. Did you explain to them that banning the burqa is a priority above all else, because it is about defending the values of the Republic. Banning will lead to freedom and equality. And fraternite is about brotherhood, so women don’t count anyway.
Your latest proposal to fine husbands whose wives wear the niqab or even send them to jail for a year, could prove very handy, merci beaucoup. Women who want to get rid of their pesky husbands just need to cover their visages, and ‘bam!’, off he goes out of her life for a bit of porridge.
So why do you dislike it so much when women cover their faces? Is it because you want to look at other people’s wives? After all, French presidents do have a reputation for a roving eye. Well, a bit more than just the eyes roving, eh? I noticed that you bonded with President Berlusconi over your shared interest in philanthropy philandering.
Seeing as you know exactly who these veiled women are, perhaps you could just ring them up and ask them nicely to stop wearing the niqab? You know, like a favour to the president.
Or if you want to be a little more classy in your request you could send each of them a personalised letter a la Queen (did you see how I used my ‘A’ Level French in that sentence? Impressed aren’t you). You could even use a similar tone to her letters to those who’ve reached 100 years old: “Thank you for your contribution and presence so far, but I think you may not be around for much longer.”
We should take a moment to be serious – although to be fair it is a bit hard to take you seriously when you feel scared of an itsy bitsy teeny weeny bit of cloth. When it comes to security, Muslim women are generally happy to comply with checks. If you are worried about integration then these women should be included, rather than excluded. And there is one point we agree on - there are indeed women who are forced to cover up through fear and convention. You’re not helping them, because you’re imprisoning them at home and reducing their engagement with the world around them – the world that you say will make their lives better. It’s a case of two men fighting to oppress women. Monsieur Sarkozy, your face should be red with shame.
Which brings me to my final point and what to do about your face – I think I have a good suggestion of what you can do with any unused stocks of niqabs and burqas. Just place the cloth over your face and tie the ends around the back of your head to cover your face and voila! The world will become a better place for everyone else. Come to think of it, you might need two of them. You are a politician after all,
Yours,
Shelina Zahra Janmohamed, from behind my Union Jack niqab which I am wearing in temporary protest
Posted by taxi2driver on December 30, 2009
France’s First Lady Carla Bruni Sarkozy – Latest Nude Pics vs why Mr Sarkozy ban the burqa from France?      It’s always struck me that French President Nicolas Sarkozy knew what he was getting into when he married Carla Bruni. It is either pure stupidity or blind lust. There’s something almost admirable about Carla’s refusal to be embarrassed by her extensive sexual past, and her two decades of bohemian life. Carla never lied about who she was or what she did – and I, for one, appreciate that. She understands that once a whore, always a whore. Just that there higher level and lower whores. The highest level ones go with Presidents and Prime Ministers. When she was a model, Carla posed nude many, many times. And before she even met Sarkozy, she had a relationship with a married man, Raphael Enthoven. When they broke up, apparently Raphael still had many photographs and videos of Carla – many of them nudes, or perhaps even a few sex tapes. What to do with a sex tape of yourself with an ex? Raphael decided to hand these items over to his brother, Julien. He must have announced to the world when he did this. Julien’s Paris apartment was just burgled – and the thieves got away with the photographs and the sex tapes. Police are investigating, but people feel strongly that sometime soon, a Carla Bruni sex tape will be leaked. It is strange that the burglar only interest is the sex items, and even stranger that the burglar knew the tape is with Julien. CLICK HERE TO WATCH NUDE VIDEOS OF CARLA BRUNI SARKOZY
DON’T BAN THE BURQA, QUESTION IT NIKHAT KAZMISHOULD MR SARKOZY BAN THE BURQA FROM FRANCE? DEFINITELY NOT. BECAUSE BANS ARE UNDEMOCRATIC AND AN UNQUALIFIED ATTACK ON INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM. SHOULD WE HOWEVER USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO QUESTION THE EFFICACY OF THE BURQA, THE CHADOR, THE VEIL OR WHAT YOU WILL? DEFINITELY YES. SPECIALLY SINCE THE BURQA ISN’T JUST ANOTHER PIECE OF CLOTH BUT HAS A LOT OF IDEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL CONNOTATIONS TO IT. THE FRENCH PRESIDENT HIMSELF HAS TERMED IT A SYMBOL OF SUBSERVIENCE WHICH HAS NO PLACE IN A SECULAR STATE.
DOESN’T IT HAVE RELIGIOUS CONNOTATIONS, YOU MAY ALSO ASK? BUT HEY, JUST LET’S KEEP RELIGION OUT OF THIS. PRIMARILY BECAUSE, AS SCHOLARS POINT OUT, THE QURAN MAKES A MENTION OF MODESTY RATHER THAN THE WORD ‘BURQA’ WHEN IT COMES TO WOMEN’S APPAREL. THE VEIL HAS MORE A CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE IN ISLAM THAN A THEOLOGICAL ONE. THE QURAN CATEGORICALLY MENTIONS THAT “THE BEST GARMENT IS THE GARMENT OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.” (7:26) AND RIGTHEOUSNESS MAY OR MAY NOT BE INTERPRETED AS THE BURQA, DEPENDING ON THE PERSONAL CHOICE OF THE PERSON.
TALKING SPECIFICALLY OF A DRESS CODE, THE TEXT HOLDS ‘CHASTITY’ AS MANDATORY, BOTH FOR MEN AND FOR WOMEN. A TRANSLATION OF THE VERSES BY DR RASHAD KHALIFA’S STATES: “TELL THE BELIEVEING MEN THEY SHALL SUBDUE THEIR EYES (AND NOT STARE AT THE WOMEN), AND MAINTAIN THEIR CHASTITY. AND TELL THE BELIEVING WOMEN TO SUBDUE THEIR EYES AND MAINTAIN THEIR CHASTITY.”
NOW CHASTITY IS DEFINED AS A CONDITION OR QUALITY OF BEING PURE OR CHASTE. AND RIGHTEOUSNESS IS RELATED TO ETHICAL CONDUCT. NEITHER OF THESE TERMS HAVE A SARTORIAL CONNECTION, HAVING MORE TO DO TO WITH STATES OF MIND AND STYLES OF BEHAVIOUR, RATHER THAN A PIECE OF CLOTHING. WHILE THE BURQA HAS FOUND FERVENT ADVOCATES AMONGST ITS USERS, THERE HAVE BEEN STRONG CRIES AGAINST ITS PROLIFERATION IN A PROGRESSIVE, MODERN WORLD WHICH IS FAST MOVING TOWARDS GENDER EQUALITY. IN AN AGE WHEN MEN AND WOMEN ARE PERCEIVED AS EQUAL, WHAT EXACTLY IS THE ROLE OF THE BURQA WHICH WELL AND TRULY WRAPS THE WOMAN IN A CLOAK OF INVISIBILITY. UNDERSTANDABLY, THERE HAVE BEEN RADICAL FEMINIST PROTESTS AGAINST THE VEIL FROM THE ARAB WORLD ITSELF. PROMINENT AMONGST THEM BEING THE VOICE OF NAWAL EL SA’ADAWI, FEMINIST AND INTELLECTUAL, WHO SEES THE MOVEMENT FOR THE VEIL AS JUST ANOTHER OFFSHOOT OF THE “THE AGE-OLD PATRIARCHAL STRUGGLE OVER WOMEN’S HEADS, THE FEAR THAT THEY MIGHT BEGIN TO THINK AND THROW OFF THE BONDS OF SLAVERY, OF AN INFERIORITY ENFORCED ON THEM IN ALL RELIGIONS AND IN ALL SOCIETIES…THIS WAS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THEIR STRUGGLE TO MAINTAIN MEN’S CONTROL OVER WOMEN, MEN’S CONTROL OVER THEIR MINDS. THIS WAS ABOVE ALL THE DESIRE OF ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISTS TO PRESERVE THE POLITICAL POWER THEY EXERCISE OVER SOCIETY.”
WHILE WE WOULD NOT LIKE TO TAKE SUCH A STRIDENT POSITION AGAINST IT, SPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES FROM FREE WILL, WE WOULD LIKE TO WONDER WHY IT IS IMPORTANT FOR WOMEN TO HIDE THEMSELVES WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE TO DRESS DECENTLY, BEHAVE MODESTLY, MAINTAIN CHASTITY AND BE RIGHTEOUS WITHOUT THE VEIL TOO. MOREOVER, IN SOCIETIES — AND CIRCUMSTANCES — WHERE WOMEN FEEL IT IS EASIER FOR THEM TO MAINTAIN CHASTITY MORE THAN THE MEN, ISN’T IT TIME TO ABANDON THE VEIL EVEN MORE. FOR ANY PREVENTION AGAINST CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN DOES NOT LIE IN HIDING WOMEN FROM UNTRUSTWORTHY MEN. THE CURE LIES IN MOVING TOWARDS A MORE GENDER SENSITIVE SOCIETY WHICH IS ONLY POSSIBLE IF MEN STOP LOOKING AT WOMEN AS OBJECTS OF GRATIFICATION. A BURQA IS NO GUARANTEE FOR THAT. A HEALTHIER INTERMINGLING OF THE SEXES AND A MORE OPEN SOCIETY ARE THE ONLY SUREFIRE WAY OF ENSURING BOTH MODESTY AND EQUALITY.
BUT BANS SURELY ARE NOT THE WAY OUT MR SARKOZY. SPECIALLY NOT IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment