Leader of the House of Commons and former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw recently asserted that he would prefer if Muslim women who come in to his constituency surgery to see him did not wear a veil over their faces. He also said it was his intention to spark a debate as in his view, the veil represents a physical barrier to communication and a symbol of separate identity. While it may be politically astute for Mr Straw to have made these comments, in the wider context, it is UNBELIEVABLY IRRESPONSIBLE for him to have said what he said.
We live in a society where many people are made to feel uncomfortable by scantily clad women and young girls exposing their cleavage, mid-riff and wearing implausibly short skirts. We are not supposed to complain about this and anyone should suggests that these girls may need to cover up is labelled a prude and considered odd. Yet there seems to be a groundswell of support for this move to demonise the veil which is the opposite of everything in this society which seeks to objectify women.
In Islam the veil is meant to preserve a woman’s modesty. In much the same way that not all women are comfortable in low cut tops and mini skirts, some women prefer to be covered up. Not all women are comfortable with being ogled and wolf whistled at. As long as a woman chooses to wear the veil of her own free will then what is the problem? Women should not be compelled to wear a veil but neither should they be compelled to remove it. I think those who claim to be made uncomfortable by the veil are really saying they are uncomfortable around Muslims.
There is not doubt that there has been a rise in anti Muslim feeling in Western Europe and North America since 9/11 and the subsequent terrorist attacks around the world by evil and twisted pseudo-Islamic radicals – the ‘al-Qaeda types’. The reasons for the attacks and the premise of the War on Terror are complex but suffice to say the killing of non combatants is always wrong whether in
Osama bin Laden and his ilk have been trying to convince disaffected young Muslims that the so called War on Terror is simply a pseudonym for a War on Islam. The government in London and Washington have been trying very hard to refute this saying often that they realise that not all Muslims share the sentiments of al-Qaeda and even if some think their grievances are legitimate, almost none approve of their methods. There are probably more violence prone white racist thugs in the
If we are to win the
3 comments:
I don't agree with you. Whether the woman chooses to wear the veil or not, there are several instances when you need to see the face of the person talking to you. JAck Straw said he asks the women to remove the veils when they come into his office, there is no point in having a meeting with someone if you can't recognise them if you meet them later on the street, especially if you're their MP.
When I was at Uni, there was a muslim girl who wanted to wear her veil for examinations, how can you do that? How do you know that the person who is wearing the veil is not an impostor? Can you imagine teaching a student for 4 years, and you're never seen her face before?
There are obviously some instances where a veil would not be appropriate. In a bank, at airport security and indeed for examinations, it would be unreasonable for anyone to expect to be fully veiled throughout. Meeting an MP is not one of those times. It is perfectly possible to have detailed and involved conversations without seeing a persons face over the phone. People have met and fallen in love over the internet after conversation where they don’t see each others faces.
As an MP it is Jack Straw’s job to make the people who come to him comfortable and not get comfortable himself.
I still don't agree. Let's flip the script. If there was a female muslim MP, would she wear her veil at all times, so much so that no one would know what she really looked like?
Post a Comment