July 13, 2010- The National Assembly of France passed "the French ban on face coverings" also dubbed the Burqa Ban. This ban makes any face covering, including the niqab, and long robes like the abaya illegal in public. The face covering ban (Burqa Ban) in France takes the façade of protecting Muslim women from oppression who are allegedly coerced into wearing modest and full coverings, but reality it is just as oppressive to take away a person's right to wear what they desire. And what makes this worse is that feminist can't wait for the ban to spread, especially to the democratic and progressive countries in Europe and in the West. Even the feminists believe that women wear abayas by force and that those who wear it are abused and degraded, and so they push support at the unjust ban which violates basic freedom. The feminist doctrine calls for an equality and advocates freedom for women, freedom from societal stereotypes and archetypes, domesticized roles, and domineering impositions from social authorities which threaten the value of a woman.
The Burqa Ban is a highly controversial topic, and the views vary to the extremes. Some people definitely argue that women are in fact being degraded through full body coverings which reduce the entity of a woman into something invisible or indistinguishable as a human. Also, they argue that most women are forced to wear coverings like the Burqa and niqab because of the Islamic Shariah law, which seems to be an oppressive and totalitarian tool of submission. But I can attest that some women will agree with me that the coverings do the exact opposite. They raise the value of a woman who cannot be judged by her body and her appearance, but rather has to be evaluated by her pers...
... middle of paper ...
...d oppressed women from being degraded. The blind acceptance of stereotypes and its partner in ignorance can be corrected and prevented. Instead people should help support the coverings which help women from a leering public which often defines a woman by her looks and clothes and amount of sexualization instead of character. A true feminist stance should be taken by helping women keep their rights to cover themselves and by promoting modesty as to stop the increasing degradation of all women through social media. A stance not only for women to cover themselves but for women to be able to wear what they want without being pressured or forced into the will of another. Feminism started and should remain an institution that promotes the doctrine of social, political, and other rights of women to be equal to those of their male counterparts.
Feminism and the right to equality has been a long and arduous struggle for women before the Civil Rights Act. The Feminine Mystique sparked a change, questioning society, which continues today as women fight for equal treatment regardless of laws that claim for their protection. Feminists will continue to fight for the day where women will be treated as equals, where there will be no gender bias, and for the day when a woman can state her mind, just as her male counterpart, without being called an uptight
In the article, Chesler uses several persuasive appeals in an attempt to convince readers to support France’s ban on head coverings. While some may argue that banning religious clothing infringes on Islamic law, Chesler points out that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” In an appeal to logos, Chesler uses facts, gathered from educated Muslim women and Islamic scholars, to show that this argument is illogical because the burqa is not required. Chesler continues logos appeals by citing the Sheikh of al-Azhat University as saying “The niqab is tradition. It has no connection to religion.” This passage demonstrates ethos as well, but carries on the idea that burqas and niqabs are not required by Islamic law, making the ban perfectly logical. The idea is that, since these garments are not mandatory in the Koran’s broad requisite of “modest dress,” the ban does not infringe on religious rights, making the ban a logical choice. Chesler takes the argument one step further by insisting that the burqa is not only optional, it is detrimental to wearers. The argument that “it is a human rights violation and constitutes both a health hazard and is a form of torture” to women who wear burqa exhibits both logos and pathos. By pointing out that burqas are a possible “health hazard,” Chesler uses unappealing syntax to make readers believe that burqas are unhealthy and i...
Obviously, from the security point of view, the wearing of burqa should be banned as we need to be able to identify people walking the streets, and that the garment mutes body language which could give us valuable warnings. The ban of burqa could evidently reduce the risk of terrorist attacks, because the personal identification would be much easier. As for the health issues, wearing burqas itself causes health risks which was clearly confirmed by many medical professionals. Undoubtedly, women's field of vision is limited and they are unable to see their path clearly. In addition, burqas are linked to hearing loss, asthma, skin problems, cardiac disorder, and also can contribute to mental health
Martha Nussbaum main argument tries to convince her audience on The Stone, a philosophical blog that includes mostly educated and philosophical people like herself, by presenting evidence that introduces topics about religion and the first amendment. Nussbaum opposition says that by being covered there is a risk that people might see it as threat. Nussbaum disapproves this by talking about how “...many beloved and trusted professionals cover their faces all year round: surgeon, football players, dentists,skiers, and skaters…”(Nussbaum). Nussbaum uses this to make people understand that others discover their face and don’t face the same discrimination as other people do just because they are Muslim. Nussbaum also tries to defend the burqa from the criticism that it is oppressive, harmful, and used to try to put down women. Nussbaum explains in her article “...society is suffused with symbols of male supremacy that treat women as objects. Sex magazines, nude photos, tight jeans- all of these products arguably, treat women as objects…”(Nussbaum). Nussbaum explores the hypocrisy of the argument made against her by showing that women are still oppressed with or without the
Ever pass by Muslim woman in a hijab at the mall or park and think how oppressive and restraining her culture must be? Maysan Haydar, a New York social worker who practices the Muslim tradition of veiling, believes otherwise. In her article, “Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering,” Haydar highlights on her experiences as a Muslim living in an American culture, where showing more skin is the “norm.” Haydar speaks specifically to a crowd who unconsciously makes assumptions about certain Muslim practices, in hopes of sharing the truth behind them. Haydar suggests that, contrary to popular belief, not all Muslim women cover themselves strictly as an “oppressive” religious practice, but that some women, like herself, find
She makes the case that Western feminists have radically misinterpreted the veil. For many Muslim women, the veil acts as a divide between the public and private. The veil may actually liberate women from “the intrusive, commodifying, basely sexualizing Western gaze”. The veil frees women from the oppressive hyper-sexualization of found in Western culture. Reducing the veil to a symbol of oppression disregards the possibility of female agency outside a Western feminist paradigm. The veil has the potential to liberate women in the public space. Projecting our Western notions of sexuality and gender roles denies the possibility of different forms of sexual
Muslims, Sikhs, and many other religious affiliations have often been targeted for hate crimes, racial slurs, and misfortunate events. We are all different in our own ways some are good and some are bad yet one event changes everything for everyone affiliated with the group. The book The Politics of the Veil by Joan Scott a renowned pioneer in gender studies gives a detailed and analytical book of about the French views towards the Muslim females in France during 2004. The author talks about why the French governments official embargo of wearing conspicuous signs is mainly towards the headscarves for Muslim girls under the age of eighteen in public schools. The main themes of book are gender inequality, sexism, and cultural inequality historical schools used in the book are history of below, woman’s history, cultural history, and political history. In this essay, I will talk about why Joan Scotts argument on why the French government’s ban on wearing conspicuous signs was
Fatemeh Fakhraie’s essay “Scarfing it Down,” explains how Muslim women suffer because of what they wear. Fakhraie blogs about Muslim women in her website she explains; “Seeing ourselves portrayed in the media in ways that are one-dimensional and misleading." Several people judge Muslim's by their appearance because they assume they're a bad person. The author of this essay wants the reader to know that Muslim women wearing a hijab are not a threat to the world.
The burqa affects women negatively and positively, in both emotional and physical aspects, and is seen as a universal symbol of oppression which can arguably be taken to the extreme for the benefit of other countries. The physical effects of Muslim dress can be positive, but mostly negative; Journalists contend that burqas can lessen the hassle when dealing with one’s physical appearance, but can negatively affect health and be very uncomfortable. According to Doucleff, “‘wearing the hijab eliminates many of the hassles women have to go through — such as dyeing their hair,’ she says. ‘For example, you're getting old, and gray hairs, when you wear the hijab, you might not think about dyeing your hair because nobody sees it anyway.’”
International human rights standards protect the rights of persons to be able to choose what they wish to wear, and in particular to be able to manifest their religious belief. Thus, Human Rights Watch in their report, focusing on the hijab ban for state officials in Germany, said that: “Restrictions should only be implemented where fully justified by the state, and be the least restrictive necessary”.1 Proclamation of wearing the hijab in public institutions as illegal is undermining the autonomy of individuals, their right to choose, their right to privacy and intimacy, and their self-determination. In addition to this, several European countries such as Germany and France directly prevent women wearing hijab to work or attend school in the public state institutions, which further intensified already negative attitude of Western public towards wearing hijab.
True feminism sought for women to have freedom and rights, such as the right to vote, the right to gain an education, and the right to equal wages. In most aspects, we have been given these rights, but radical feminists are not content. There has been a jump from “We are equal to men,” to “women are superior.” Women have been fighting stereotypes for ages, proclaiming how horrid they are, yet quickly turn around and stereotype men and see no issue with this hypocrisy. The way for women to reach the equality they seek is to bring others up as well as themselves, not to tear them down. When feminists realize and act upon this, they will begin to see the results they have been hoping
The hijab is a very important and powerful Muslim symbol that is worn by billions of Muslim women all over the world. Many wear the hijab as a symbol of faith, while others wear it to protect themselves from society’s expectations of women. Some people think that banning the use of the hijab in public is a violation of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. However, others think the banning of the hijab is a necessary precaution. The wearing of the Muslim hijab should be banned in public because it is impractical, Muslims use it to separate themselves from society, and it is a security risk.
“French Parliament to Consider Burka Ban.” CNN. June 24 2009. Online. Available http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/06/23/france.burkas/index.html?iref=all search. Jan 5 2010.
Muslim women come from the Islamic faith. Islam is a monotheistic religion where its followers (Muslims) believe there is only one true God, Allah, and honor and love the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), the last prophet of the God. Just like in any other religion, Muslims, particularly women, have rights and requirements within their religion. As well as wearing hijabs, Muslim women have the right to dress however they like, choose who they would like to marry, have the right to an education, and lead an imam.
Feminism is defined as the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes. It began as an organized activity on behalf of women?s rights and interests. This concept was developed to help women earn a place in a predominantly male society. Unfortunately over the years, the intentions of feminism have become distorted, not only by anti-feminists, but also by the feminists themselves. The principle of equality for women and men has turned into a fight in which feminists wish to be better than men. Feminism has been twisted and misunderstood so much that it has become a harmful idea.