The Islamic face veil is a barrier to integration in the West.

Introductory comments:Women's clothing and body marking has historically been a central marker of a women's social status. In the West, as well as elsewhere, different forms of women clothing has symbolized submission, rebellion, or emancipation. For example, Women's wearing of trousers or not, or women's hair length, has had considerable debate in the West. What is clear, by acknowledging these debates, is that the external representation of women through clothing and body is extraordinarly important to "integration." I argue that the Islamic face veil poses problems for integration, because it represents ideas that are diametrically opposed to Western culture. 1. “Wearing the burqa is an act offensive to Western culture and should therefore not be allowed.” a) It is offensive because it symbolizes male control of women and the total exclusion of women from the public sphere. b) Why do I have to prove Western culture is superior for my argument to work? I thought I was arguing that the Islamic veil is a barrier to integration in the West. As such, I took Western culture as a starting point for discussion. We are not debating whether Western culture is superior to other cultures, only whether Western culture is compatible with the Islamic face veil. 2. “According to Fathi, the burqa exists as a tool for men to control their wives.” a) Every Muslim source I have looked at explicitly relates the veil not only to “modesty” but to female seclusion. b) Con’s criticism addresses a strawman. Whether Muslim scholars think the face veil is optional is irrelevant to my argument. So what if some scholars think the “face veil is not even part of the minimum female hijab dress code”? First, this does not indicate that those who wear it wear it by “free choice.” Second, Con’s insistence that the face veil is voluntary obscures the historical purpose, context, and effect of the face veil: patriarchal tyranny over women. 3. “According to the rationalizations provided by Muslim men, women must wear the burqa because, if they don't, men will rape women who show their face in public.” Quite a few Muslim academics have made this argument: Qasim Amin, Tahrir al-mar’a; Zainab al-Fawwaz, “Fair and Equal Treatment”; Bahithat al-Badiya, “Mabadi al-Nisa’I”; Mostafa Hashem Sherif, “What is Hijab?”; Nawal El Saadawi, “The Political Challenges Facing Arab Women at the End of the 20th Century”.For example, Islamic feminist and academic Fadela Amara stated: "The veil is the visible symbol of the subjugation of women, and therefore has no place in the mixed, secular spaces of France's public school system." [1] That said, what Muslim academics have said is irrelevant to this debate. Since the debate is framed from the perspective of the West, we should be asking what Western academics have to say. For that, see: Margot Badran’s Feminism in Islam, or the works of countless other Western academics, including Judith Tucker, opponents of face veiling. 4. “Because of veiling, women were not allowed to get an education, nor to have any role in political life. In fact, they were not allowed to have any role at all in public life.” Con states: “When Muslim women choose the veil, they must also bear in mind there may be certain professions they cannot take because of it, but also there are professions that may suit them perfectly. But this doesn’t mean they cannot by any means contribute to society.” No, according to the history of the veil, it has been a marker of female seclusion. This means women were not allowed to participate in public life. That is the history and meaning of the veil. Con has demonstrated no evidence to contest the history and meaning of the veil as such. 5. “Con argues that it is the right of woman to wear the veil. Con has provided no evidence that woman have this right.” Con argues: “What right does he have then to demand evidence from that woman that it is her right to wear what she likes, so long as it’s not harming/offending anyone?” The key here is Con’s second clause, “so long as it’s not harming/offending anyone.” It offends Western culture precisely because it symbolizes female seclusion and patriarchal tyranny over women. This is offensive to the majority of civilized Westerners. The women who wear it many not think they are harming themselves, but according to the West, they are. Con’s patriarchal arguments are not subtle, trying to conceal themselves under a façade of giving women the right to choose. Women’s right to voluntarily wear the face veil doesn’t change what the face veil represents nor does it change the fact that the face veil is harmful and offensive. 6. “The veil clearly represents the patriarchal oppression of women.” Con has not provided any “Islamic rulings” that show the veil is not meant for oppressing women. And even if Con were to show such rulings, they would be rulings that completely ignored the purpose, history, and effect that the veil has had in Islamic societies. Con claims my comments are “generalised clichéd comments and opinions.” My comments are supported by history, as well as both Muslim and Western academics. The Islamic face veil represents female seclusion from public life. It is incompatible with Western culture, and therefore, it clearly poses a barrier to integration in the West. The resolution is affirmed. [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk...