Category Archives: Women

Is the burqa compatible with French nationality? Apparently not

Posted on by Bob Pitt

La burqa est-elle incompatible avec la nationalité française? Une Marocaine de 32 ans, mariée à un Français et mère de trois enfants nés en France, vient de se voir refuser la nationalité au motif qu’elle “a adopté, au nom d’une pratique radicale de sa religion, un comportement en société incompatible avec les valeurs essentielles de la communauté française, et notamment le principe d’égalité des sexes”.

Pour la première fois en France, le Conseil d’Etat, dans un arrêt du 27 juin, a pris en compte le niveau de pratique religieuse pour se prononcer sur la capacité d’assimilation d’une personne étrangère.

“Cette affaire montre que le droit est de plus en plus amené à se prononcer sur les conflits de valeurs que pose l’islam à la société”, constate Didier Leschi, ancien chef du bureau des cultes au ministère de l’intérieur, spécialiste de la laïcité.

Le Monde, 11 July 2008

Via Islam in Europe

Update:  See also the Guardian, 12 July 2008 and the Independent, 12 July 2008

And the report has been taken up at the”left-wing” neocon blog Harry’s Place, where it has attracted the usual selection of thoughtful, humane comments. For example:

“It is the perogative of any Government to deny citizenship to immigrants if they feel they will not contribute to society.”

“Bravo France! Now you should put the icing on the cake and deport the entire family.”

“Why be a citizen of a country that you have no interest or knowledge of, but in fact live in complete alienation to?”

“… if I were a Muslim and didn’t want to work, I’d move to London, claim persecution and get benefits. It’s free money rammed down my throat. Not only that, but the native Britons won’t care a whit if I start saying that their country should be more like the country I ‘escaped’ from. In fact, even if I get a bunch of my friends to blow up a train and kill 50+ people, they will defend me, and maybe even give me a bigger house.”

“… the problem is not whether the woman wears the Burqa of her free will, but rather that her desire to be a devout Muslimah may eventually spill over as a desire to impose her norms on the host nation.”

“Judaism is not a proselytizing or supremacist religion while Islam is.”

“The burqa is the 21st century’s swastika armband.”

“The sad thing is the West has become so remiss – if not complacent – in defending its values. It’s a shame this sort of thing does not happen much more often.”

“Yes, the French are right; the UK should have done the same thing years ago.”

“Excellent news. The French judiciary has much more sence [sic] than ours! … citizenship is more than just a recognition of residency, it is membership of a community with a particular history and values. We have lost sight of this in Britain, as the Islamists are well aware.”

“There should be no Burqas in this continent or in this century. I shouldn’t even have heard of the word. Vive la France.”

“Truly devout and reclusive Muslim Women may be good breeding machines, but their contribution to society is at best doubtful. There is a good reason for keeping them out. A woman may breed an indefinite number of jihadis, whereas a man is hopefully only blowing himself up.”

“… the burqua is a reliable flag for strong mainstream Islamic views, which it is not hyperbole to describe as fascist; it’s really that simple.”

“Why on earth would this woman wish to be a French citizen? Surely it stands for so much that she opposes, especially women who think for themselves and live independent lives and flaunt their faces in public. Wouldn’t she be much happier in say, Saudi Arabia?”

“There is no reason to be, on an institutional level, tolerant of the very most intolerant people on Earth.”

Further update:  For Yusuf Smith’s comments, see Indigo Jo Blogs, 13 July 2008

Racism row in Switzerland over minaret ban referendum

Posted on by Bob Pitt

SVP sheep posterAnother racism row flared up in Switzerland after the country’s far-right party managed to trigger a referendum on banning minarets in the country.

The demand for a popular vote was driven by the nationalist Swiss People’s Party (SVP), which used an image of a white sheep kicking a black sheep off the Swiss flag to illustrate its anti-immigration policies in last year’s election campaign.

The SVP has a record of using the country’s system of direct democracy to provoke debate about immigration. This year it lost a referendum on moves to make it harder to obtain a Swiss passport.

The party said it had chosen minarets because they were “symbols of political-religious imperialism” rather than simply traditional architecture. Dominique Baettig, an SVP MP, said: “It is like the veil, it is a symbol of non-integration. We hope that this initiative sends a clear signal that we are calling a halt to the Islamisation of Switzerland. Our hard-won individual liberties are being eroded and that is not acceptable.”

Jasmin Hutter, vice-president of the party, added: “Many women, even socialists, signed this petition because not one Swiss woman can tolerate the way that Muslim men treat their wives.”

Times, 9 July 2008

The Islamisation of Brooklyn

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“I was Brooklyn bound – or so I thought. I took the subway to see a fellow alumna of New York’s High School of Music and Art (as today’s LaGuardia High School for the Arts was then called). I looked forward to the nostalgic reunion. I hadn’t been in NYC for ages, and catching up with an old classmate seemed an indispensable component of walking down memory lane.

“What’s more, Kathy still lives at the same address in the cozy middle-class neighborhood where I sometimes visited her way back then. It was common for the house-proud Irish to keep property in the family, and hence I’d soon reenter the two-story red-brick home in whose wood-paneled rec-room we occasionally whiled away hours.

“But when I climbed up the grimy station stairs and surveyed the street, I suspected that some supernatural time-and-space warp had transported me to Islamabad. This couldn’t be Brooklyn.

“Women strode attired in hijabs and male passersby sported all manner of Muslim headgear and long flowing tunics. Kathy met me at the train and astounded me by pointing out long kurta shirts as distinguished from a salwar kameez. She couldn’t help becoming an expert. She’s now a member of a fast-dwindling minority because ‘people are running away. We’re among the last holdouts of our generation. My kids have fled’.

“Pakistani and Bangladeshi groceries lined the main shopping drag, and everywhere stickers boldly beckoned: ‘Discover Jesus in the Koran’. An unremarkable low-slung building on the corner of Kathy’s block was now dominated by an oversized green sign identifying it as Masjid Nur al-Islam (the Light of Islam Mosque) and announcing that ‘only Allah is worthy of worship and Muhammad is his LAST prophet’. Here too Christians were urged to ‘turn to the Koran’ if they were ‘genuinely faithful to Jesus’.

“It wasn’t hard to identify the remaining non-Muslim residences. Kathy’s was typical. A huge American flag fluttered demonstratively in the manicured front yard, accompanied by a large cross on the door and an assortment of patriotic/jingoistic banners.‘We’re besieged,” she explained. ‘Making a statement is about all we can do. They aren’t delighted to see our flag wave. This is enemy territory’.”

Sarah Honig in the Jerusalem Post, 7 July 2008

‘Making stuff up’ – Mark Steel replies to Trevor Kavanagh

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Mark Steel“The most common justification for ridiculing Islam is that the religion is ‘backward’, particularly towards women, as a fundamental part of its beliefs. The Sun‘s old political editor suggests this as a defence of his newspaper’s stance, saying that under Islam, ‘women are treated as chattels’.

“And it’s true that religious scriptures can command this, such as the insistence that, ‘a man may sell his daughter as a slave, but she will not be freed at the end of six years as men are’. Except that comes from the Bible – Exodus, Chapter 21, verse 7.

“The Bible is packed with justifications for slavery, including killing your slaves. So presumably the Sun, along with others who regard Islam as a threat to our civilisation, will soon be campaigning against ‘Sunday Schools of Hate’ where children as young as seven are taught to read this grisly book….

“In his defence of making stuff up, the Sun‘s ex-political editor spoke about the amount of domestic violence suffered by Muslim women. But there’s just as much chance of suffering domestic violence if you’re not a Muslim, as one of the 10 million such incidents a year that take place in Britain. Presumably the anti-Islam lobby would say, ‘Ah yes, but those other ones involve secular wife-beating, which is not founded on archaic religious customs, but rational reasoning such as not letting him watch the snooker’.

“And finally the Sun‘s man defends the line of his paper by saying that, after all, these Muslims ‘are trying to bomb our country’. So it’s their civic duty to make stuff up – the same as keeping a look-out for spies during the Second World War.

“So we should all do our bit, and every day send in something, until the press is full of stories like ‘Muslims in Darlington have been raising money for semtex by organising panda fights’. Or ‘In Bradford all nurseries have been ordered to convert their dolls’ houses into miniature mosques so that Muslim teddies have somewhere to pray’.”

Independent, 9 July 2008

Letters from today’s press

Posted on by Bob Pitt

In the Independent, responding to Peter Oborne’s excellent article, Kate Francis condemns violence against Muslims but goes on to oppose the “blanket application of the pejorative term ‘Islamophobic’ to anyone who has voiced concerns about the long-term capacity of Islam to coexist successfully in a secular state where the rights of women are protected by law. As a feminist, I have deep concerns about this, as I do about any group (religious or otherwise) that appears to enshrine misogyny in its cultural values…. it’s no wonder that writers are prefacing their comments with ‘I am an Islamophobe’ and ‘Count me in’.”

Another correspondent, one Dominic Kirkham, writes: “The remark of Shahid Malik that British Muslims now felt like ‘aliens in their own country’ (4 July) is problematic…. In seemingly every area of cultural contact, however open and welcoming, Muslims choose to distance themselves from the generality on the basis of ‘their religion’. Unless they themselves are prepared to question the arcane prejudices that lie at the root of ‘their religion’ they will continue to feel like aliens in normal society by their own choice.”

And here’s Shaaz Mahboob, of British Muslims for Secular Democracy, in the Daily Telegraph:

“The assumption by Lord Phillips (report, July 3) that interpretations of Sharia could become an alternative form of conflict resolution for British Muslim communities will merely result in further alienation and segregation. Only hardline groups, such as the Muslim Council of Britain and the Sharia Council, have been demanding the introduction of Sharia as a parallel justice system. In a democratic society, paying heed to, and endorsing the views of, minority but vocal pro-segregation Muslim groups is nonsensical, and could be disastrous for a cohesive society.”

McEwan’s attack on Islam reveals only his ignorance

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“The more that the West demands change from outside, the more it makes such issues as women’s rights the litmus test of reform, the more difficult it makes the task of those pushing for change from within. The more it resorts to terms such as ‘Islamofacism’ and ‘mediaevalism’, the greater its ignorance of the pressures and the possibilities of societies in flux today. There are no generalities, just particulars, specific to place, person and moment.

“You would have thought that the novelist of all artists would understand this. Apparently not. But at least McEwan, Amis and the rest are showing one thing: that the condemnation of that which you have no wish to understand is as much the prerogative of the secularists as it is of the religious.”

Adrian Hamilton in the Independent, 26 June 2008

Spanish minister under fire for criticizing Islamic headscarf

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Bibiano AidoSpain’s Equality Minister Bibiana Aido has angered Muslims by criticizing the Islamic headscarf, alleging that it undermines the rights of women, media reported Thursday. Muslim men could dress in Western clothes, Aido said, asking why women wearing loose clothes and headscarves could not do the same.

“Not all cultural practices must be protected and respected,” she said, expressing her opposition to practices “violating human rights and promoting inequality” between the sexes.

Muslim women “wear the veil because they feel like it,” representatives of Spain’s Muslim community responded, advising the minister “not to talk about what she does not know about.”

The Koran advised both men and women to dress modestly, said Mansur Escudero, president of the Islamic Board.

Earth Times, 26 June 2008

Denmark’s veiled soccer star

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Zainab al-KhatibODENSE — Zainab al-Khatib commanders the attention of the women national soccer team fans not just with her unmistaken talents, dribbling skills and spectacular goals but also her colorful hijab. “I’m so glad that I set a precedent in Denmark,” 15-year-old Khatib, the star of the national team for girls under 16, told IslamOnline.net.

She was recently chosen to join the team after receiving permission from the Danish Football Association (DBU) to be the first ever hijab-clad girl to play for a national team, not only in Denmark but across Europe.

Khatib, who only started her professional football career two years ago, is now the striker for the national team. She has led her team to an impressive victory in their latest match against Sweden, scoring a wonderful goal.

“Zainab has a strong personality and her attitude is always positive and inspirational in and outside the court,” her coach Troels Mansa told IOL. “She is one of my best players and I am so glad to be her coach.”

Khatib believes all the fuss over hijab is meaningless. “It is always wonderful to be able to strike a balance between your religious duties and your hobbies.”

She says her teammates are very supportive. “They have welcomed me into the team and I faced no obstacles. During our match with Sweden, some players were surprised to see my hijab but nobody commented.”

She wants her contribution to the team to demonstrate the willingness of Danish Muslims to integrate into society. “I see myself as a Danish Muslim who effectively contributes to her society and will be proud to represent my country abroad.”

Islam Online, 25 June 2008

John Rentoul on the Bushra Noah case

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“Everyone thinks that the tribunal’s decision is absurd, lunatic, political-correctness-gone-mad. Everyone, that is, with the exception of a tiny minority in that strange alliance of political Islamism and revolutionary Marxism, which condemns the popular reaction as Islamophobia…. hairdressers should be free to choose whom to employ, even on strange criteria, and even on criteria that depend on what people look like…. the Liberal Democrats are best placed to lead this great liberal cause: that the law, while protecting people from racism, should have nothing whatsoever to do with the ‘injury to feelings’ sustained by the holding of religious beliefs about clothes and hair. Nick Clegg: over to you.”

Independent on Sunday, 22 June 2008

The ‘politics of inclusion’ takes a hit

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Hebba Aref and Shimaa AbdelfadeelA disgraceful thing happened at Detroit’s Joe Louis Arena earlier this week.

Americans were discriminated against by other Americans who thought head scarves would send the wrong message about their candidate’s religious affiliation. In other words – the soft bigotry of Islamophobia is finally ready for its close-up in the Obama campaign.

Hebba Aref was born in the United States 25 years ago to Egyptian immigrants. She is a lawyer and a taxpaying citizen. Ms. Aref is also an American Muslim, though there is some debate in this country whether her religious affiliation undermines her claim to be a “loyal American.”

Ms. Aref and her friend, Shimaa Abdelfadeel, were among the 20,000 Americans who made the pilgrimage to downtown Detroit to cheer for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama in person.

For months, Mr. Obama has been traveling the country, assuring audiences that the success of his campaign is proof America is turning the corner on the politics of racial and religious suspicion. Mr. Obama promises that he’ll be an exemplar of a more inclusive politics. He insists that the old divisions of race, gender and religion that polarize our politics today will not find favor during an Obama administration.

So the question must be asked: Why were two Muslim women wearing hijabs told by Obama campaign workers that they couldn’t sit behind the candidate during a televised speech because of the “sensitive political climate”? On what planet would such cowardice and discrimination be consistent with a politics of inclusion?

The Obama campaign issued an apology as soon as the incident was reported: “It is offensive and counter to [our] commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run,” the campaign statement read. “We sincerely apologize for this behavior.”

Fair enough, but how did lowly campaign workers decide that Muslim head scarves weren’t ready for prime time with Barack Obama? Could it be that the Obama campaign’s almost pathological fear of being associated with Islam when so many Americans continue to believe the candidate is a “secret Muslim” has trickled down to the ushers?

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 20 June 2008

See also “Obama calls 2 Muslim women to apologize for snub at rally” in the Detroit Free Press.

Meanwhile the inimitable Debbie Schlussel is witch-hunting Hebba Aref and Shimaa Abdelfadeel with accusations of terrorist sympathies and antisemitism.