I saw this on Russian television as the attacker was an Russian ex-pat. Anyways, they are totally getting this wrong, as it is about religious choice and the desire for women to cover up. They should have the freedom to do this if they want, just as much as they have the freedom to not want to do that.
France making a big deal of it only allows justification for others to make comments about that. And well Germany needs to address itself for being racially insensitive.
But then again the U.S. needs to do this as well, but we're working on it.
@envirodesigner: The thing is, Germans have addressing racism and Antisemitism and prejudice in all its forms. Yet these tragedies still occur. A lot of German-language academic time and energy, as well as public time and energy, has been spent analyzing how things went so terribly wrong.
@envirodesigner: When I was in Germany I was very impressed by the Hessian Minister of the Interior's take on national security and the threat of radical Islamist terrorists. Basically he made clear that radical Islamist terrorists are not in any way representative of the Muslim population of Germany. He went on to propose that the best way to prevent terrorism would be to make sure that at-risk immigrant youth feel engaged and important in German society, not disenfranchised or ostracized. Waaay more progressive than anything I heard during the same era in the USA.
I can't respect the burqa (the head coverings are something else) because I am hard of hearing and I need to read lips to understand people. I would feel bad and would have to ask someone else to help a woman if I ever encountered one (in a customer service situation) and they would probably think I'm a racist or something.
On the other hand I want to respect someone's "choice" to wear what they want. Though I think it is an oppressive one through and through. I hate sounding ignorant and I know I will never thoroughly understand their culture but it was made to make sure men don't get aroused and its purpose is to hide the woman because men have a problem with it so yeah it is oppressive no matter which way to try and spin it.
@sweetdiesel: I understand that a burqa would prevent you from communicating directly with the person, but why does that mean you can't respect the burqa? I realize it makes it more difficult for you, but if you explain that you read lips, nobody is going to assume you are biased.
It's easy for people in the West to see discrimination and submission in other cultures, but not our own. There have been many feminist Muslim scholars who have pointed out that you can just as easily criticize the markers of femininity here...the very high, wobbly heels, the oppressive need to be seen as sexy all the time, the exposed cleavage and perfect breasts...And they have a point. So how can we really throw stones?
My question is: I think the burqa is problematic, but I also have issues with our culture's values, too. How do you weigh which is worse? Which is really worse for women, being hidden or constantly on display?
@portia_sue: yeah I'm not sure ranking different cultural forms of subjugation is really that helpful. I'd focus on empowering women legally and economically and making sure they are free to be in the public sphere regardless of how they are dressed, so that the choices they make with regard to how covered or uncovered to be are most likely to be freely made.
Gah. Ok. So I had this whole thoughtful comment with some anecdotes from my personal experience concerning my family and growing up in Canada and being Muslim and all that, but somewhere between a last minute scan of the comment and hitting submit my comment was lost to the depths of the internets forever. Gah.
If you ever find the time to write it again, DM it to me, I would love to hear it. You have insightful comments about everything, and I like hearing pretty much everything you have to say.
Ooooooh. Weird, violent, anti-religious group behavior in Germany. I'm feeling so relaxed right now! (and, no, not throwing stones -- I know the US is all effed up with our anti-groups issues, too).
I wish I understood what was so threatening about women being dressed however they choose (and whether we approve that choice or not or think they're being oppressed or not; if a woman says it's her choice, I'm going to believe the woman rather than infantilizing her by saying she's wrong about her own choice).
I live in a very diverse area of Chicago and see all kinds of scarves, robes, burquas, etc., nearly every time I go out including at the gym. BIG FREAKING DEAL!
As for France, are they also disallowing the wearing of nuns' habits and yamulkes? Or just Muslim women's clothing?
@JennaW: If I remember correctly, they have been trying to ban the wearing of all religious iconic items, including the yarmulke and even crosses on necklaces. What I can't figure it is how they think this will make everything better, by denying people their ability to proclaim their beliefs freely. It's just going to lead to even more religious intolerance.
@JennaW: A 2004 law banned "conspicuous" religion signs (hijabs, yarmulkes, and "large" crosses) in public schools across France. The current debate focuses on the niqab (face-veil) and some are trying to ban it outright, not just in schools. A couple of things to keep in mind. I'm not sure how an outright ban would ever pass muster under the European Convention on Human Rights. Also, the fact that the French keep calling it 'the burqua' shows how generally ignorant pro-banners are, given that the burqua is specific to Afghanistan and does not even exist in France.
@JennaW: Sorry, that wasn't a dig at you. I didn't even notice! You would think, though, if you're going to try and legislate against it, you would at least know what it's called! :)
But the burqa does exist, and is worn by a very small percentage of women, in France. The niqab is slightly more common, but both are worn by an increasing number of women. Considering the small number and unclear number of women who do wear them, I would definitely hesitate to say it "doesn't exist in France."
Interestingly enough, many of the women who are choosing to wear burqas and niqabs in France are French born and of North African descent---they are from countries where both forms of clothing are rare and not traditionally worn. So the origin of the clothing is irrelevant to those who are wearing it. And the increasing number of women who are wearing these types of clothing therefore aren't necessarily the result of immigrants refusing to adapt to a new culture--they are the result of a cross cultural exchange.
The terms are interchangeable in French, and more detailed suggestions by politicians and newspapers have explained that the ban would include "full length robes and veils," which would mean both types of attire and possibly more.
@Katxyz: The same thing is happening with Somali immigrants in the US. Many are choosing to cover (usually a niqab or hijab, more rarely a burqa) even though they come from families that did not, traditionally, in Somalia. One family I spoke to said that they felt their displacement/civil war was punishment from Allah for not being devout enough, and they have to make up for it now.
I also think that part of it is reactionary - they see their children rejecting Somalian culture in favor of American, and choose to go further in the other direction in an attempt to stop it.
I've noticed the getting-more-conservative thing and dressing in a specific, non-mainstream ways as a reaction to perceived sin (in the world or self) or societal pressures (wanting to set oneself apart from society in defiance of those pressures) or as a sign of piety -- in many religions and denominations. The FLDS is an extreme example of Christians doing this; Mennonites are a much more integrated-into-society example of same.
Not that this helps people look at things more reasonably; negative reaction to The Other is always waiting to rear its head.
@Katxyz: Honestly, I have never seen a woman in burqa in France (and spent three years living there, working with pious Muslims). And I have yet to see a picture of the burqa that is not from Afghanistan. Never say never, I suppose, but could you point me to some evidence that women in France are wearing it? That words like burqa, tchador, voile, hijab, etc. are interchangeable in French is actually deeply problematic, since it suggests an inability and unwillingness to contextualize. It's a way of amalgamating the specific context of second-generation women, many of whom wear any type of headscarf by choice, to the oppressive regimes of Iran, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. The choice of words -- like burqa -- is purposeful ignorance, I would argue. It helps to marginalize these women -- many of whom are *citizens*, by the way -- as foreign, un-French, frightening, extremist, etc. So word-choice matters. [And to be clear, amongst many Muslims, niqab and hijab are generally non-national-specific; words like chador/tchador and burqa are specific to the national contexts of, respectively, Iran and Afghanistan.]
Oh my GOD, you know what else is "degrading"? Being called a terrorist in a free country because of the way a woman chooses to dress or worship. I'm not one to defend organized faith, but this is downright oppressive, and I can't believe that there actually has to be an argument about it.
Wow. Just... wow. Sometimes, when I hear of crazy stuff like that occurring, I think Europe needs to melt a little more. And when I do think this, it blows my mind, since I also tend to think of the continent as a bit more socially advanced than we rednecks over here. Then, I recall that we have our crazies too, I just choose to ignore them or not live in their general area. But yeah. That's pretty messed up, Mr. German Terrorist Accuser.
The bottom line is that attempting to "free" women of any religious garb is completely impossible, because the people wearing that garb will tell you that they WANT to wear it. Women who don't want to wear headscarves and burqas in free countries like France and the States simply don't wear them. But explicitly telling women what they can't wear is just as problematic as nations that tell their women what they have to wear.
Now whether or not religions brainwash women into thinking that they need to wear these things for modesty is a different story. But Sarkozy can't step in and change the entire structure of a religion that says women must cover themselves to remain modest and avoid driving men wild with lust. That would require outlawing an entire religion from France, and that would be shitty. And I believe that is partially his intent here...to further "otherize" the Muslims of France.
So, I guess what I'm saying is, Sarkozy needs to back off. Decisions of dress shouldn't be state matters, whether we think it's unfair to members of that religion or not. The most the state can do in this case is to provide an environment in which an individual may choose to leave or defy their religion. For example: Rather than banning prairie garb for FLDS members, we enforce laws that prptect FLDS women from being hunted down when they choose to shed their prairie garb. We don't make martyrs of the religion by banning the damn dresses from the entire country.
@LolaQuinn: I was just coming down to comments to write exactly this. It is a great injustice to individual liberty for the state to ban OR require religious garb. If a woman wants to wear a head scarf for religious modesty, no one should stand in her way or attack her for it.
@amowls: Yup you've found us out, collectively we Germans are all murderous psychopaths. Thanks for reminding me, I haven't committed my random act of brutality today.
@amowls: Okay, calling you out. This makes no sense to me. WWII did not magically erase all prejudice from Germany or the world. Did the end of slavery stop Americans from discriminating against and lynching black people? No. You cannot hold an entire nation responsible for the actions of a few, like you are in this case. Also, the Nazis were antisemitic up to and during WWII and even after. I would even argue, to be historically accurate, the Nazis were much more than just antisemitic since they systematically murdered six million Jews.
@amowls: Just like the one German soldier who chose to save my pregnant, Jewish grandmother's life during WWII did not represent an entire country, the man who stabbed Marwa al-Sherbini does not represent an entire country.
It's not only disingenuous but dangerous on the part of the government of France to equate an article of clothing with negative traits. They're making these women targets by allowing the populace at large to make sweeping generalizations about them. If you're already inclined to be prejudiced against Islamic people, the French government has just validated your bigotry.
@my cousin is an ape: This was my first question. Do they not have metal detectors? Did he file his toothbrush into a shiv? Is there not a bailiff? What the hell, German court?
@blazedom: The attacker's hate crime was apparently inspired by her headscarf, and thus is an extreme example of the bias against headscarves that people like Ikram Es-Salhi describe. Whether the proposed headscarf ban in France is just another iteration of said bias (and, yes, of xenophobia) or an actual effort to liberate women, is a related question. But yes, I too wonder how on earth this man was allowed to stab her 18 times -- and how the guard can justify "mistaking" her husband for her attacker.
I have an uneasy feeling that over the next decade nativist-immigrant tensions in Europe over Islam are going to escalate to a degree that will make race relations in America look like a hand-holding contest in CandyLand by comparison.
Wow. Thanks for posting this.. Since I live in Germany right now, I can tell you Jezzies that this unfortunate event has made the entire country wither in pain and genuflect in apology.. I mean, the daily editorials in the papers have been INSANE! Germans as a nation are hyper-sensitive to the notion of discrimination these days, and more so to what they call "Vergangenheitsbewältigung," ie, "dealing with the past." Their past of discrimination. That's like, the crucible of what it means to be a contemporary German person, and they take it so seriously. Strange how extreme incidents continue to define and shape their perception as a people as far as the outside world is concerned.. They have their nuts, for sure, but they are, hands down, an EXTREMELY tolerant state at the legislative level, and most people I interact with on a daily basis--granted, I live in Berlin, which is this bubble of cosmopolitan non-Germanness--are NOTHING but tolerant, or apologetic for the mistakes of the past.
@snugbug: Except I just found a swastika daubed on the wall of the Jewish cemetery on Schoenhauser Allee... Plenty of intolerance in Berlin, alas. Got yer Nazi laden in Mitte and Prenzelberg, and last night neo-Nazis thugs beat a man near to death in Friedrichshain...
@bowleserised: I've surely peeped my share of dumb-ass hateful wall art here. I was just saying that I've personally never come into contact with any of these neo-Nazi a-holes over the past three years, and to me (to just me, personally) they don't represent a significant slice of the Berlin experience..) Maybe I should hang out more in Marzahn, or Pankow, or wherever the heck these pests reside. Prenzelberg thugs.. that TAKES THE CAKE! Holly moses, I've always associated that Bezirk with parents pushing strollers and a chill-out vibe. Oh well..
@snugbug: I've heard some horror stories about xenophobia from some of the stroller pushers in Kollwitzplatz, alas! Yeah, the world is shitty... Berlin is poor... It's not pretty. But I still love it here.
I'm trying to find a German article that might clarify their perspective on this, but I haven't seen anything on der Spiegel (in English or German) so far. I'm still looking, because I'm curious, but I think that's somewhat telling already.
Edited by counterclockwise's using her promoting-power for good at 07/13/09 3:09 PM
counterclockwise's using her promoting-power for good was starred
counterclockwise's using her promoting-power for good was unstarred
07/13/09
France making a big deal of it only allows justification for others to make comments about that. And well Germany needs to address itself for being racially insensitive.
But then again the U.S. needs to do this as well, but we're working on it.
07/14/09
07/14/09
07/13/09
On the other hand I want to respect someone's "choice" to wear what they want. Though I think it is an oppressive one through and through. I hate sounding ignorant and I know I will never thoroughly understand their culture but it was made to make sure men don't get aroused and its purpose is to hide the woman because men have a problem with it so yeah it is oppressive no matter which way to try and spin it.
07/13/09
07/13/09
My question is: I think the burqa is problematic, but I also have issues with our culture's values, too. How do you weigh which is worse? Which is really worse for women, being hidden or constantly on display?
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
If you ever find the time to write it again, DM it to me, I would love to hear it. You have insightful comments about everything, and I like hearing pretty much everything you have to say.
07/13/09
I wish I understood what was so threatening about women being dressed however they choose (and whether we approve that choice or not or think they're being oppressed or not; if a woman says it's her choice, I'm going to believe the woman rather than infantilizing her by saying she's wrong about her own choice).
I live in a very diverse area of Chicago and see all kinds of scarves, robes, burquas, etc., nearly every time I go out including at the gym. BIG FREAKING DEAL!
As for France, are they also disallowing the wearing of nuns' habits and yamulkes? Or just Muslim women's clothing?
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
But the burqa does exist, and is worn by a very small percentage of women, in France. The niqab is slightly more common, but both are worn by an increasing number of women. Considering the small number and unclear number of women who do wear them, I would definitely hesitate to say it "doesn't exist in France."
Interestingly enough, many of the women who are choosing to wear burqas and niqabs in France are French born and of North African descent---they are from countries where both forms of clothing are rare and not traditionally worn. So the origin of the clothing is irrelevant to those who are wearing it. And the increasing number of women who are wearing these types of clothing therefore aren't necessarily the result of immigrants refusing to adapt to a new culture--they are the result of a cross cultural exchange.
The terms are interchangeable in French, and more detailed suggestions by politicians and newspapers have explained that the ban would include "full length robes and veils," which would mean both types of attire and possibly more.
07/13/09
I also think that part of it is reactionary - they see their children rejecting Somalian culture in favor of American, and choose to go further in the other direction in an attempt to stop it.
07/13/09
I've noticed the getting-more-conservative thing and dressing in a specific, non-mainstream ways as a reaction to perceived sin (in the world or self) or societal pressures (wanting to set oneself apart from society in defiance of those pressures) or as a sign of piety -- in many religions and denominations. The FLDS is an extreme example of Christians doing this; Mennonites are a much more integrated-into-society example of same.
Not that this helps people look at things more reasonably; negative reaction to The Other is always waiting to rear its head.
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
Now whether or not religions brainwash women into thinking that they need to wear these things for modesty is a different story. But Sarkozy can't step in and change the entire structure of a religion that says women must cover themselves to remain modest and avoid driving men wild with lust. That would require outlawing an entire religion from France, and that would be shitty. And I believe that is partially his intent here...to further "otherize" the Muslims of France.
So, I guess what I'm saying is, Sarkozy needs to back off. Decisions of dress shouldn't be state matters, whether we think it's unfair to members of that religion or not. The most the state can do in this case is to provide an environment in which an individual may choose to leave or defy their religion. For example: Rather than banning prairie garb for FLDS members, we enforce laws that prptect FLDS women from being hunted down when they choose to shed their prairie garb. We don't make martyrs of the religion by banning the damn dresses from the entire country.
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
Generalizations are such fun.
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
I thought it was very interesting, and sharing is caring after all.
07/13/09
07/13/09
This woman was stabbed 18 times while a courtroom of people watched.
Wearing it was her own choice, so I dont understand why jezebel isnt focusing on the more pressing issues raised by her murder.
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
There's no racism in Europe! That happens only in the American South. Smart, upperclass, regular white people never harbor such sentiments!
07/13/09
07/13/09
I don't know! I'm from New England/Britain/California/abroad so I just don't "understand" racism, you know?
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
PS: Boulettes soon? =)
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09