“THE being who opened the door was like nothing I had ever seen. Swathed from head to toe in black cloth, she looked like a huge crow and had a beak or some kind of metal grille in the place where her face should have been.”
So writes the Mail’s Allison Pearson, who recalls the time when working in a primary school she walked home Hatice, a little Muslim girl with “incredible mischief in her eyes”.
It’s a piece entitled “Here’s why the veil so offends me”, and Allison is unlikely to be wearing one any time soon.
It’s impossible that Allison will not be the only person, or being, offended by reading her input into the veil debate.
And while Mail readers worry about Muslim punks, and farmers wonder if burkas can scare not only a strand of the British population but also crows, the Star hears another writer’s foray into the veil debate.
It’s Salman Rushdie, the man who introduced the term “fatwa” and “naughty but nice” to the greater British consciousness. Alongside a picture of Salman’s wife dressed in a belly-dancer’s two-piece (“Well would YOU want her to cover up?”), the paper hears Salman say that the Muslim veil “sucks”.
“RUSHDIE: VEIL SUCKS,” says the Sun’s front page. The Mail says the “row” over British Muslim women wearing veils “deepened” when Rushdie appeared on Radio 4.
Referring to Jack Straw’s comments, Rushdie says: “He was expressing an important opinion which is that veils suck – which they do.”
He goes on: “Speaking as somebody with three sisters and a very largely female Muslim family, there is not a single woman I know in my family or in their friends who would have accepted the wearing of a veil.”
So not all Muslim women wear the veil, although if the role demanded it than surely Salman’s wife Padma Lakshmi, billed on her website as “the first internationally successful Indian supermodel” and an actress, would put one on.
And not all Muslim men want Muslim women to wear the veil. Which would suggest that this “row” has been going on for longer than Jack Straw has been involved. And it will continue after the tabloids have done with it…
Posted: 11th, October 2006 | In: Tabloids Comment (1) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- coolandcalm on Celtic Fans Ruin Remembrance Sunday With Sectarian Chants, Sky Presses Mute
- June on Tripta Kaushal Is The World’s Worst Driver, Video
- james carruthers on X Factor: Simon Cowell Seduces Lucie Jones’ Grandma And Jedward
- Ragheed on Virginia Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki Hails The ‘Hero’ Nidal Hasan’s Lap-Dances For Allah
- tee on X Factor: Jedward, John & Edward, Are Voted Out, But Then
June 18th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
I think it is wrong to allow a group of people to seclude themselves from society by masking their face. The veil worn in public makes it clear that ‘they don’t to be part of society’. In view of the reasons for the veil being worn ‘men are pressumed to have no control over their sexual urges and women that don’t cover are pressumed to be without dignity’ i think it’s highly immorally and offensive to all men and women, when this garment is worn. It judges all men to be sex beasts and women without dignity. No one should be given the right to discriminate against men and women in public. Nor should they be allowed to cry racist when challenged about showing their face. Racism doesn’t come into it. Racism is a lever being used to further a right to wear a garment that is a religious symbol no less. Religious beliefs of this extremeness belong in the home or places of worship where they don’t infringe on the rights of others. In addition, the veil gives out mixed messages to different people, i asked a young boy why he thought the teacher hid her face when the man came in the classroom, he replied ‘the women had done something wrong and was scared of the man’. That insight from a 9 year old boy is shocking. That said, the actions of the veiled teacher teach young girls cover up its shameful to show ones body’, it also teaches that women are submissive and that men are to be feared. These are indoctrinations we don’t want to force onto children in schools. The veiling could also cause young boys to grow up resenting women as it tells them ‘you are not worthy to share my space’.
As for the outcry in regard to jack straws request, a simple one that most of us never need to be asked ‘can i see your face’, i find it laughable that he was labelled as being racist. Eye tests require the face to be unveiled, so does dental treatment and operations? I take it that all veilers go without these things??? So are these people that offer these services also racist? I think not. When the racist card is played by veilers its nothing more than an attempt to get their own way. Where is my right to see who i am talking to? Racism has no place in this issue. This issus is about veilers wearing a uniform to identifiy their difference. I also perceive it as a display of their intolerance for people that are different to them. To allow a group of people to wear publically their beliefs over their head and face is intimidating, it also ensures they dont have to participate in society. The purpose of the veil is to cause a barrier, it does that with flying colours. I feel let down by the powers that be for allowing this divide to happen. Showing your face is respectful in uk. Helmets are removed out of respect, so are hoodies and hats. Why should a group of people be allowed to hide their face? No one elses difference offends me as they don’t hide their face and peer out from behind a veil. This is 2007, not 700. No one should be able to make others feel as if they are not worthy. Religion has too much importance in society and it’s all one sided. No one should have the right to wear a portable barrier to keep out those different to them. I do think human rights are being manipulated by veilers and that they have the upper hand. What about the rights of others that don’t hide their face? We have none. Only in the workplace can a female be prevented from veiling, as it’s sexually discriminating against men when they veil among them.
Communication problems caused by veils are another matter. Voices are muffled under a cloth. I could go on about this issue but i think the video of the teacher on u-tube makes clear the difficulty in understanding what the teacher was saying. She too had trouble understanding the questions put to her.
When veilers liken their right to veil to that of a surgeons, its laughable almost. Some other instances of masks worn are below: Bike riders helmet is worn to protect the head from injury should they crash.
Surgeons or dentists’ surgical mask
is worn to protect from blood splashes and to prevent infection. It’s also smaller and thinner and attaches around the ears. Its the surgeons/dentist duty to protect the patient and themselves from infection.
Rugby and hockey players face mask and helmet is worn to protect from injury.
Welder’s mask is worn for health and saftety reasons.
Fencer’s mask is worn to protect from injury.
Not veiling doesn’t cause the wearer health and safety issues. Veils are also not required for speech. If they were life saving, i would accept them. If the person had a skin allergy to daylight, no one would object as exposure to light can kill people with this condition.
I think all religious dress symbols should be banned from the workplace and schools, so that no one can wear anything religious. That way the rule is fair. Schools are not there to accomadate religious requests, they are there to educate children. Religion belongs in the home and in places of worship. Until this loophole is tightened up, there will not be equality among men and women. France and Turkey imposed dressing curbs, why on earth can’t the UK. On a larger scale, how do we know who we are talking too? If we can’t see them….The veil is not a religious requirement in the quran and it’s not compulory in Islam, so why is it choice here? How does one know all those that wear it, do so by choice? Given that females would be scared to speak out against their forcer.