Liberty and Freedom: Racism, feminism and banning the veil

The vote in the French lower house to ban the wearing of the face veil in public is a dangerous development in the intensification of Islamophobia in Europe (Racism veiled as liberation, 15 July). That it has been proclaimed as a victory for women’s rights makes it all the more appalling. Racism is being legitimised by giving it a feminist spin. Banning the veil, or any other sort of Islamic dress, has nothing to do with liberating women. Liberation, if it is to mean anything, is about self-determination. This must include choice about how to live and dress. It is a myth that women only wear the veil because men force them to. Many women wear the veil in defiance of their parents. Why? Because they see it as a statement of pride in their religious identity and a refusal to be cowed by state-endorsed demonisation of Islam.

If there are women forced to wear the veil by a male family member, how will the state forcing them not to wear it help? Such enforcement can never be progressive. The result will be that, far from being liberated, such women may become completely excluded from public life. It has become mainstream common sense to denounce Islam as somehow uniquely backward and oppressive. For those of us who genuinely believe in challenging oppression and fighting for women’s liberation, we see it for what is, racism. Across Europe the only beneficiaries of such laws will be the far right.

Yes! Also: European countries are denying non whites an identity. The general sentiment is that these people are not French (or Dutch or Spanish or whatever other nationality) in spite of being born and raised in their respective countries of residence. The Dutch even have this little insidious word to define them: allochtoonen. This word has been misappropriated from biology and it is used to define anything that is not native to a given ecosystem. The Latin root for the word is “other” (as in a way to define that which does not belong). The state has determined that children of immigrants, in spite of having been born here, are “others” (allochtoon) to the Dutch social ecosystem. So, in spite of carrying a Dutch passport and birth certificate, having only attended Dutch schools and having lived all their lives in this country (and nowhere else), they will carry an otherization label their whole life. As a result of this, many second and third generation immigrants turn to their Muslim identity in an effort to have an identity at all, one that has not been imposed on them through alienation. The end result is that many women choose the veil as a visible statement of belonging somewhere and exercising this autonomy. Since the system has made it clear that they are not wanted, that they do not belong and that they are forever going to be defined as “foreign”, then at least they will wear a label with which they can signal that they do belong somewhere.