Thinly veiled...

This is really a comment riffing on (or ripping off) Sol's post, but in light of the length, I'm posting it separately.

Not that common sense needs academic verification (I beg pardon of all social psychologists among our readership), but most of the "work" done on women's rights in Islamic societies supports Sol’s view. Wearing veils of any sort is more often an expression of the wearer's agency, rather than direct imposition by another barty, notwithstanding the fact that this "choice" may reflect a desire to avoid scorn within the moral framework of a patriarchal society. The argument, thus, is that if a woman makes the choice to not be called an "exhibitionist whore," it is no less her choice.

Curiously, the Qu’ranic passage most often quoted in this debate echoes this conclusion almost explicitly. Surat Al-'Aĥzāb (33:59) states that female “believers” should draw their “jalabeeb” over themselves, “that they may be recognized and not molested.” Exactly what sort of garment would be the modern equivalent of a jalab and how much of a woman it should cover (hair, face, eyes) is a point of strong debate. Nevertheless, the passage indicates that the veil announces or even confers the social status of “believer” within a society in which non-believers do not hold the same rights.

The Qu’ran makes no provision for Muslims living outside of Islamic society, nor do the Hadith – the other primary sources of Islamic law – or the early commentators. Therefore, if we may infer that the primary function of veiling is to express one’s religious affiliation (and assumedly, pious observance), rather than to serve a religious duty in itself, the issue that rises is not one of Feminism so much as the Canadian “salad bowl” vision of immigrant culture. For the veil to serve its original social function, one must presuppose a society that recognizes Muslimhood as being more respectable than other religious affiliations.

It does seem ridiculous to legislate that a woman cannot wear something that gives her “more rights” within her own community, unless the real issue is that a separate community, with distinct moral…let’s call them “valences” for Benny…exists within the larger Canadian culture, and more importantly visibly interacts with it. If a law were made against Confucian-inspired corporal punishment within Chinese families, I think few people would complain outright, but it would be impossible to enforce – mostly because it wasn’t occurring in the public milieu of the Canadian public.

The veil sticks out like a scimitar scar on the cheek of French Canada, because it exposes that there is already a community with unequal privileges that support its assimilationist policies: bienvenue au Québec. Ignatieff’s support of the ban further indicates that his base may be facing a broader question of how many separate cultural frames the country can support before it starts to lose its strong sense of itself, especially if these frames are accompanied by expressions of cultural superiority (and unequal rights for unveiled women). (Theoretically, one could argue that the ban is Feminist not because it liberates observant Muslim women, but because it frees other women from the scorn of Muslim men by making them harder to differentiate.)

See what I did there? I conflated the superiority that veiling confers within (certain) Muslim societies with its multiple expressive uses in the Canadian context. I did it by drawing from the Qu’ran as if I could reach a privileged understanding of Islamic law from a single quote. Prime Orientalist work, you say, Mr. Said. It is, but I believe that’s the thought process that can justify such a ban, without also banning nuns' habits and priests' collars. And I believe such thinking will persist until Canada and other Anglo-European democracies can stop pretending that assimilation is not a prime concern of their respective majorities.

For a little context on the ban, glance at this article from the Gazette. Please note the part stating "10-15" women might have worn a niqab out to the polls to get an idea how urgent this legislation was. I probably see 10 niqab on a sunny bike downtown, although that's a different valence altogether..