Have a look at this post by “Samhita” at Feministing on Muslim women wearing the full-faced veil in European society —an issue raised lately by Tony Blair, Jack Straw, and Salman Rushdie. Samita’s is the kind of thinking that makes you want to blow shit up:
Many women wear veils to stand in solidarity with nationalist imperatives. Agree with it or not, it is not really yo biness. Furthermore, these annoying obsessions with the veil as the “ultimate” sign of subjugation are misleading. The veil is but one issue Muslim feminists are working on (and that varies VERY much by geography and country).
This is low-grade gibberish. The poor woman starts off with plenty of bravado for Otherness and Submission, but slinks into the corner by the end of the paragraph. “Nationalist imperatives” are expressed in a self-imposed sumptuary law dictated by a religious belief? I can’t imagine why any Englishman would think that that’s at odds with true assimilation into one’s host culture! But, then, Samhita says that the veil is but “one” issue Muslim women are “working on”? What is there to “work” on, madame? Are you suggesting that there might be some progress made? Some change in the habit?
Two men discuss what they think is appropriate for women in “other” countries. And in a sweeping statement Rushdie gives the anti-Muslim world but another reason to focus on the overemphasized symbolism of the veil. But our gaze is still one way. Why not just stop looking? Get over the fact that the male gaze cannot reach them, as they are covered.
I don’t think Blair or Straw care about the veil in other countries. They are talking about a personal choice being made by Muslim women in their country. And in Great Britain —as elsewhere throughout the West— it is clearly unnatural and alien for women to cover their faces. It is, as Rushdie says, a means of taking power from women. And, so, we have the spectacle, as it were, of multiculturalist feminists defending the right of men to subjugate women? That’s perverse, clearly. People who hide their faces are essentially dishonest members of society. How can you trust someone whose face you are not allowed —because of some absurd sense of propriety or shame— to even see?
Finally, giving a piece of cloth, a symbol so much power is problematic. What about the greater patriarchal structures that are taking away women’s power, like blocked access to voting or education? Why isn’t Rushdie commenting on that? Simply stating that the veil is the source of oppression is a tad bit of an oversight wouldn’t you say?
If wearing the veil is no big deal, then why make it one? Dispensing with such a slight barrier between Muslim women and the societies in which they choose to live shouldn’t be any problem at all, right? But what makes it a problem is the retarded rationale that goes into the wearing of the veil. It is an anti-social act imposed by men on women whom they are instructed by the so-called word of God to treat as second-class citizens.
Monday morning, to give you an example of why this issue annoys me so much, I was idling in line at the drive-thru at McDonald’s. In front of me was a woman in a full veil —sitting there behind the wheel of some sort of SUV and ordering fast food. I couldn’t help but glare at her. And I’m pretty sure she saw me because I was watching her eyes reflected in her driver’s side mirror.
Who do you think you are?
You’re in the drive-thru line at a McDonald’s —and I’m supposed to believe that you can’t go one more step and accept this infidel society by losing the mask?
I don’t accept that.