As I walked past the cash register on my way into the store, I noticed three Muslim women in full burqa like in this photo. They were totally covered, with just slits for their eyes….
I won’t pretend it wasn’t surprising. It was. There were several reasons for this, not all of them fair or rational. Firstly, because I couldn’t see their faces which somehow feels sinister even if it’s not. Secondly, because I can’t help but feel that these women are repressed and controlled by a faith that doesn’t allow them the simple liberty of breathing unencumbered by thick fabric. Or allow them to feel the air and sunlight on their faces.
As the women paid for their purchase and moved off into the shopping centre, I overheard a snatch of conversation between the next customer and the sales assistant who had just served them. “Wow, that’s a bit full-on, isn’t it” said the customer, gesturing to the Muslim women who were now out of ear shot. “Yeah” replied the sales assistant. “Whenever they come in here like that I’m worried they’re going to blow me up!”
Edit HTMLThe pressing question is, is that discomfort a good enough reason for a government to legislate about religious dress? I think no. France’s President Sarkozy thinks yes. He has called for the burqa to be banned in his country.
The Times Online reports: “In our country we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity,” Mr Sarkozy said to applause in the parliament’s ceremonial Versailles home. “The burka is not a religious sign. It is a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement,” he added. “It will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic.”
Mr Sarkozy was adding his voice to a strong consensus that has emerged this
month against women in France’s five million-strong Muslim community who
wear the full or nearly-full cover of their bodies and faces.
Muslim leaders reacted cautiously to Mr Sarkozy’s words on the burka. Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Great Mosque of Paris, called the
President’s remarks “in keeping with the republican spirit of secularism”.
Moderate Muslims also saw full face-covering as a symbol of submission, said
Mr Boubakeur.
Measures against face cover are supported by two of the three women Muslims in
the Cabinet but other ministers are questioning the wisdom of legislation
that could be impossible to enforce.
Yeah, it does seem a bit of a stretch. As uncomfortable as I find it to see a woman fully covered under a burqa, I’m equally uncomfortable with the idea of a government legislating on what people choose to wear. Should we really ban everything that makes us feel uncomfortable?
As Tory Maguire so beautifully puts it in The Punch:
I would never argue for a ban on burqas, as in this country people
should be free to express their faith however they choose. If it means
whipping themselves on the hour every hour, dancing in the forest in
the light of the moon, or demonstrating total subservience to men by
donning what is effectively an invisibility cloak, so be it.
There are people who choose of their own free will to wear the burqa as a sign of their devotion. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be allowed to call burqas for
exactly what they are – a crude and unsophisticated way for men to
oppress women.
They are custom designed for immobility, suppression, lack of expression, tunnel vision, and homogeny. And those who argue that the burqa actually frees women to move through the world unmolested, are full of it.
My father is a man, my brothers are men, my husband is a man, many
of my friends are men, my boss is a man and a large majority of my
colleagues are men.
I go through life in a pretty average Australian wardrobe that
sometimes includes a dress cut above the knee, and most of the time
includes a pair of jeans, and none of these men have every tried to
stop me or make me feel I’m being inappropriate.
Making a woman prove her devotion to her faith by hiding herself
from the men around her says a lot more about the men around her than
her devotion.
What you said, sister. I’m also perplexed about the end game in Sarkozy’s argument. Does he just assume that by banning it, burqa-wearing women will simply throw them off and dance in the streets in their jeans and sneakers (sorry, this is France, I mean Capri pants and ballet flats)?
Surely what would ACTUALLY happen is that those women would simply not leave their houses and in effect become more repressed than they supposedly are under the burqa!
If there are Muslim women reading this who can help to explain the reasons for the burqa and why women choose to wear it (do they choose or is it as we suspect – that they are forced to?) while others don’t, I would be so grateful for your comments….
As for everyone else, I’m keen to hear what you think too but please note that I will not publish any comments I dem to be racist….
Top Comments
Just been reading some of the comments on here, and it's interesting to see people's reactions to wearing a burqa.
First and foremost i am a muslim myself. For muslims who obediently follow faith, Wearing the burqa is a necessity. muslim women are required to be 'modest' in dress. so that they are not exposed, or show revealing parts of body, in order to protect them from harm and 'temptation'from men. It is not a sign of oppression, but far from it! it was ordered for the muslim women to alleviate their status and honour them!
In pre-islamic times where the women were treated like cattle; nothing more but a sexual object. Islam gave women respect and rights. and wearing the burqa is to protect her dignity, respect and self-worth, and with the issue of 'modesty' depends on how you define it.
In western cultures, where wearing revealing clothing is the acceptable norm. in middle-eastern cultures it is viewed as a repulsive and degrades women. In western cultures, in a interview for example, it would be 'modest' for the interviewer (male) and interviewee (female) to shake hands. which seems like a normal thing to do, direct eye contact- another example. in non-western cultures it would be inappropriate for the male and female to intermingle like that depending on the circumstances, in fear of 'temptation'. To some degree i can understand the 'awkwardness' of situation, where there are two totally different cultures that clash! Just the difficultly of understanding people's cultural background and ignorance. for people to come from a completely different cultural background that just dont simply understand the concept behind burqa/hijab. it is easier for them to alienate them because it is foreign to them and not seen or socially accepted as normal, and i think over time it have become 'ingrained' in west for people to assume, that just because a women wears a long dress, covering her up almost entirely, she is somehow an extremist and that goes for men who support 'more than just a stubble'.
i hope i have provided people with some answers about the burqa and it's purpose. i wanted to give my perspective as a british muslim women, and i hope i havent offended anyone! -Ayesha
Arriving at a tourist attraction with my family, I noticed another family in the carpark. As we walked in the same direction, I looked over, and to be friendly, offered up a smile...........to be confronted (and it did feel confronting) with a black veil (including netting over her eyes) of a woman about my height and that's all I could tell you about her. I had no idea if she was looking at me - smiling back, or poking her tongue out for that matter! It seems a pretty basic human need to me. Even if I don't speak the language of another person, a smile goes a long way. While I respect the right of a woman to choose to wear a burqa, I admit, I dislike them, I feel a basic need to see a face when communicating with someone, no matter how fleetingly.