Soccer Dad

The Hijab Issue Is Not A Job For Miss Manners

It could be that the one issue that will bring the simmering West-Muslim clash to a head will not be riots in France, Moslem sympathy for terrorists in England, the Moslem reaction to the Denmark cartoons, or to Pope Benedict's speech. No, instead it may be a veil.

The French have banned not only the full veil but head scarves in state schools. Some German regions have banned the head scarf for civil servants too, and they are not permitted in Turkish universities at all. Slowly, the issue is coming to the United States: Just this month a Michigan judge dismissed a small-claims court case filed by a Muslim woman because she refused to remove her full-face veil while testifying.

Of all the possible reasons for the reaction against the veil that many Muslim women wear, Anne Applebaum finds that it is not a question of political or religious symbolism. Based on her experience in a Bali temple, she sees it as a matter of politeness.

Just as it is considered rude to enter a Balinese temple wearing shorts, so, too, is it considered rude, in a Western country, to hide one's face. We wear masks when we want to frighten, when we are in mourning or when we want to conceal our identities. To a Western child -- or even an adult -- a woman clad from head to toe in black looks like a ghost. Thieves and actors hide their faces in the West; honest people look you straight in the eye.

Given that polite behavior is required in other facets of their jobs, it doesn't seem to me in the least offensive to require schoolteachers or civil servants to show their faces when dealing with children or the public. If Western tourists can wear sarongs in Balinese temples to show respect for the locals, so too can religious Muslim women show respect for the children they teach and the customers they serve by leaving their head scarves on, but removing their full-faced veils.

But I think that Ms. Applebaum may be missing the point. When someone enters a Balinese temple wearing shorts, that may very well be an issue of rudeness--but then again, Bali has a Hindu majority. It is part of Indonesia where the majority is Moslem. Big difference.

Under similar circumstances, a Moslem would not consider the wearing of inappropriate clothing as rude, discourteous, or impolite--he would consider it an insult and an affront to Islam. Wearing proper clothing is more than just respect--it is required. Depending on the circumstances, one might get more than just a polite request that you leave.

Applebaum writes:

It would, of course, be outrageous if Tony Blair or the French government were to ban veils altogether -- just as it is outrageous that Saudi Arabia bans churches and even forbids priests from entering the country.

But Muslims would not see the connection the way she does.

Muslims are not going to see the wearing of a veil as anything less than an absolute value that cannot be negotiated and must be respected. Moslems have no concept of Dina D'Malchuta Dina (the law of the land is the law), allowing for compromise when the country's law does not conflict with religious law. They make no such distinction and do not see the wearing of the veil as mere custom. To them the Saudi ban is correct--at the same time that the British and French ban is an insult. These days, such Muslims seem to be in the majority.

Which is why I think it would make more sense for Europe to start with just insisting that Muslims stop killing people they disagree with.

(Thank you to Memeorandum for the link

Thanks also to Outside the Beltway for the kind mention--and the important point about not lumping all Moslems together.)

Daled Amos

Technorati Tag: Washington Post and Hijab and Islam