The Politics of the Veil

3. How does the author come to the conclusion that “rather than resolving the problem of integrating Muslims into French society, the law banning headscarves has exacerbated it”? (179)

            The law passed by the French government that bans the wearing of religious affiliated signs is aimed towards larger, more noticeable displays of religion.  This law is to make sure the state and religion remain separated.  The Politics of the Veil discusses that small, discreet religious signs like small crosses or small Korans are acceptable, but more noticeable signs like large crosses or turbans are banned.  This regulation is believed to mainly target Muslim girls wearing headscarves.

            This law is supposed to unite the entire French community.  The headscarf, known more commonly as a veil, is abrasive to French customs.  For this reason, the society is attempting to eliminate the differences to unite the people.

Artwork on a building in France showing the integration of Muslim women and their headscarves by painting them the colors of the French flag.
susiesbigadventure.blogspot.com

            Joan Wallach Scott uses examples of women being rejected from jobs or service, in general, for wearing headscarves.  Scott quoted a woman, “The veil is a 100 percent handicap in French society.”  Employers will not hire a Muslim woman who wears a veil.  Many employees will not serve a woman wearing a veil.  An example in the text talked about the teller of a bank rejecting service to a Muslim woman wearing a veil because of the fear of being robbed.  This was the really the only example that had any reason to reject service because of a veil, and the other instances just damaged the human rights of these women.  Other examples included teachers refusing to interact with parents wearing the veils just because it was “forbidden.”  Even thought the Muslim woman in the example was a mother of five and elected to the position of the delegate of the parents’ association at the school, the teachers still refused to listen to what the woman had to say.  Reasons like this are discriminating and, no matter the law, uncalled for in any society.

            The French society is attempting to integrate the Muslim community by minimizing the differences between the two cultures.  Joan Wallach Scott has come to this conclusion through the analysis of the confrontations the law is causing.  Without this law in place, the Muslim woman wearing the scarf who wanted to speak with her child’s teacher would have had little difficulty expressing ideas to that teacher.  But now that people, like the teacher, have grounds for the discrimination they aren’t afraid to be outspoken about it.  Wearing headscarves would typically just be a part of the normal Muslim culture that the French society would grow to respect but with this law in place, the French citizens are able to single out the differences between the cultures.

            The law itself does make sense.  Separating the state and religion would be helpful in integrating all French people with different cultural backgrounds without religion interfering.  This law is just not being implemented correctly.  Banning such a large part of the Muslim culture takes away from the human rights these people deserve.

Muslim women in France protesting for their human rights.
www.barenakedislam.com

            Joan Wallach Scott makes a great point when arriving at the conclusion that this law has done the exact opposite of integrating Muslims into the French society.  If the society is encouraged to shun the Muslim women for being different, the society will only become more separated.  Turning the headscarves into a “handicap” for Muslim women makes their lives in France much more difficult.