Category Archives: Women

Why this obsession with the niqab?

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Rajnaara Akhtar“Why are we talking about the niqab yet again? Once more this non-issue has hit the headlines.

“It is obvious that in light of the difficulties our schools are facing in tackling bullying, drug abuse, alarming rates of truancy, gang culture, knife and even gun crimes, and teacher abuse; the niqab certainly does not merit the Department for Education’s attention nor subsequent front page headlines in the news.

“A handful of girls wanting to observe the niqab should not be an issue and it should certainly not attract so much media coverage. All that this achieves is to provide further fodder for the ‘it’s those bloomin’ Muslims wanting more special treatment’ camp….

“The impact of the most recent circus surrounding the niqab will empower the Islamaphobes and force Muslims to stop debating the issue of the niqab internally, and unite against a perceived attack on their religious freedom. As a result, the natural progression of the niqab debate among Muslims may have once again been hampered.”

Rajnaara Akhtar of Protect-Hijab at Comment is Free, 21 March 2007

Peterborough schools say no to girls’ veils

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The city’s newest schools have backed Government plans to ban pupils wearing full-face Islamic veils. Despite being still under construction, the Voyager School, in Walton, and the Thomas Deacon Academy, in Eastfield, have said they will ban youngsters from adopting religious full-face coverings.

New Government guidelines on school uniforms were announced yesterday and the report stated: “Schools must act reasonably in accommodating religious requirements, providing they do not pose a threat to security, safety and learning, or compromise the well-being of the whole school community.”

Peterborough City Council’s cabinet member for education Geoff Ridgway said he believed the banning of full-face veils was the right decision. He added:

“The facial reaction to anything which is being discussed is very, very important and by not having a veil it also takes away that feature of secrecy. Of course people are entitled to their own religion, but they have also got to be conscious of the society they live in. The society we live in is one where we want openness and transparency and eye-to-eye contact.”

Peterborough Evening Telegraph, 21 March 2007

And how exactly does the niqab prevent eye-to-eye contact, you might wonder. It sounds like a better argument for banning sunglasses in Peterborough schools.

Has the veil been banned?

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Britain argues, that while “there does appear to be a shift in the advice the government is giving to our schools and while a signal is being sent that those schools which, following a consultation with parents and governors, decide to forbid the niqab will be supported, the Sun is wrong to suggest that there will be a blanket ban.”

Inayat continues: “The fact is, however, there are fewer than a dozen schoolgirls who actually wear the niqab out of half a million state school pupils. Still, it will no doubt have helped Mr Johnson – a contender for the post of deputy leader of the Labour party – to look as if he was being just as tough on this issue as his rival, Jack Straw.”

Comment is Free, 20 March 2007

Sun backs Johnson over niqab

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Veil Ban on KidsVeils will be banned in schools to help pupils learn and to keep them safe, Education Secretary Alan Johnson has ruled.

His decision will affect thousands of Muslim girls who wear clothing like the full niqab. He will publish details of his guidance to headteachers in the Commons today. The wearing of full-length robes may also be affected.

A source said: “Veils mean teachers can’t see the face. It’s a problem for security and it’s also a problem for learning because the teacher can’t see whether or not a child is understanding what’s being taught. A full face veil means you can’t see who the person is.”

Ministers will say it is also dangerous under health and safety regulations. A Bunsen burner could easily set light to a face veil in a science lab, Mr Johnson will point out.

School heads will be told to consult parents before going ahead with the ban. They will tell parents they CAN uphold religious traditions provided they do not put security and learning in jeopardy. The rules will also apply to faith schools.

But Mr Johnson is convinced there will be no serious opposition to the move.

Sun, 20 March 2007

In an editorial comment the paper welcomes a ban, asserting that the niqab is “divisive” and “provocative”.

The Guardian reports that this news was “leaked in advance to the Sun by Mr Johnson” – which gives you some indication of the audience he hopes his policy will appeal to, and how he wants to spin it. He’s certainly won the admiration of one BNP blogger, who hails Johnson’s proposals as “Some good news for once!”

See also the BBC poll on whether the veil should be banned in schools.

Labour ministers should oppose niqab, says Tribune columnist

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Joan Smith“Labour must be more principled at a time when the whole notion of equal rights for men and women is under attack from religious extremists.

“Since Jack Straw became the first mainstream politician to question the practice of wearing the niqab last autumn, it’s become clear that a small but vocal minority in this country no longer accepts the premise that women have exactly the same right to the enjoyment of public space as men.

“If women have to cover their faces with a mask (which is what niqab means in Arabic) whenever they leave the house, they are signalling their acceptance of conditional access to public space – and a Taliban theory of gender relations in which women are responsible for avoiding men’s accidental arousal.

“Neither of these propositions is compatible with a notion of universal human rights, and Labour ministers shouldn’t be afraid of saying so.”

Joan Smith in Tribune, 16 March 2007

From the standpoint of this sort of secularist fundamentalism, of course, the concept of human rights doesn’t include the right of Muslim women to dress as they choose, without being bullied by white male non-Muslim politicians.

Muslim groups decry Quebec’s treatment of prison guard

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The Quebec government is turning a blind eye to sensible alternatives by forcing a Muslim woman to choose between her hijab or prison guard training, say Muslim groups. Sondos Abdelatif, 19, was told that she would have to remove her hijab in order to continue with the training program at Montreal’s Bordeaux jail. She chose to withdraw from the program instead.

Quebec’s Public Security Department said the Muslim headwear could pose a threat to Abdelatif’s safety should prisoners get hostile. “As a security measure, the hijab cannot be accepted as an element of the uniform to execute the functions of a correctional officer,” department spokesman Real Roussy said Thursday.

Continue reading →

Muslim women lose swimming pool discrimination case

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Two Muslim mothers in Sweden on Wednesday lost a discrimination case against an indoor swimming pool where the lifeguards had asked them to remove their veils and body-covering clothing.

The Gothenburg court ruled the municipal pool had not discriminated against the women. It ordered the Ombudsman against Ethnic Discrimination, which had brought the case on their behalf, to pay the City of Gothenburg’s costs of 30,850 kronor (4,375 dollars, 3,330 euros).

The women, Houda Morabet and Hayal Eroglu, were at the pool separately on two different occasions in April 2004, accompanying their young children but not to swim themselves. Both were wearing veils, long pants and long-sleeved tee-shirts because their religion does not allow them to reveal parts of their body in public.

The ombudsman argued in court that the lifeguards’ insistence that they change into tee-shirts was an act of discrimination.

Continue reading →

World’s soccer chiefs chicken out

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Accusing of the International Football Association Board of “pointless cowardice” over the Asmahan Mansour case, the Montreal Gazette also lays into the Quebec Soccer Federation, who were responsible for banning her in the first place:

“You don’t have to be Muslim to wonder how a scarf, especially if tucked in at the neck, can be dangerous. One could even make a case that an exposed pony tail – common enough on the pitch – could conceivably be riskier than covered hair. So the Quebec Soccer Federation now needs to explain itself. Can it cite safety studies? Offer horrible examples of death by hijab? Provide any defence at all of this narrow-minded ruling? If not, it should reverse itself.”

Montreal Gazette, 6 March 2007

See also “FIFA hijab ruling deserves red card”, Edmonton Journal, 6 March 2007

Hijab ban in soccer is upheld

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Azzy scoresAn 11-year-old Ottawa girl who was ejected from a soccer game because she was wearing a hijab is disappointed that the sport’s international governing body has decided to uphold the referee’s decision.

The International Football Association Board had been asked to consider the case of Asmahan Mansour, who was recently ejected from an indoor game in Laval, Que., for wearing a headscarf. The referee said the hijab, traditional headgear for Muslim girls, was a safety concern.

Continue reading →

‘Not possible to modernize Islam’ says WPI representative

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Spiegel interviews Mina Ahadi of the Worker Communist Party of Iran, who has set up a “Central Council of Ex-Muslims in Germany”. Ahadi launches an attack on mainstream Muslim organisations in Germany: “They want to force women to wear the headscarf. They promote a climate in which girls aren’t allowed to have boyfriends or go to discos and in which homosexuality is demonized. I know Islam and for me it means death and pain.”

Spiegel, 27 February 2007

The co-founder of the Central Council of Ex-Muslims, one Arzu Toker, used the press launch to claim that Islam “humiliates women and turns them into servants of the men”. She refused to distinguish between Islam and extremist fundamentalism, claiming that that “Islam is inherently radical”. Comrade Ahadi added: “I know all about political Islam. It ends up with us being stoned to death, even here in Germany.”

Monsters and Critics, 28 February 2007