Veil Ban Proposal Risks Alienating French Muslims 

Controversy over Muslim women's veils, known collectively as hijab, was stirred once again today with the release of a document written by a French Parliamentary panel that recommended banning the wearing of hijab that cover the face, such as the burqa and niqab, in public places. The report is part of an ongoing attack on the wearing of religious symbols, particularly directed at Muslim symbols, in France. The recommendation that these forms of veiling be banned in public facilities mirrors the 2004 law that banned the wearing of religious symbols in public schools.

Politicians arguing in favor of such bans have painted the wearing of either a burqa or niqab as an insult to public decency, an attack on both the French state and the rights of women wearing veils. Bernard Acoyer of the ruling Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (UMP) said that veils are “the symbol of the repression of women, and... of extremist fundamentalism”. The report itself refers to these veils as an “excess” and “states that all of France is saying 'no' to the full veil”. President Nicolas Sarkozy has called the burqa a “sign of servitude and degradation” and has stated “the burqa is not welcome on the territory of the French Republic.”

The image of Muslim women created by this discourse neglects the realities of women’s lives and their relationships with veiling. While the furor over full-facial coverings has been tremendous, France’s Interior Ministry estimates a mere 1,900 women wear such veils in a population of 5 million French Muslims. Even more relevant are the statements made by women wearing full-facial veils, such as Chrystelle Khedrouche, that their decision to wear the veil is a reflection of their own religious agency. That women choose these forms of veiling as a means to live and embody their religion seriously undermines arguments that a burqa or niqab is a sign of impeded personal agency.

As politicians puff their chests and proclaim their interest in protecting women’s rights, they loudly ignore their own role as perpetrators of neo-colonial violence. While public secularism is portrayed alternatively as a benign state or a cherished right by proponents of the veil-ban, Muslim women are forced to submit to a version of European modernity in which they have no say. The paternalistic faux-feminism of Sarkozy and others shockingly mirrors the assimilationist practices that France and many of its colonial brethren imposed on populations as they partitioned off Africa, Asia and the Americas.

While the number of women wearing a burqa or niqab may be low, the scapegoating of these women risks alienating French Muslims as a whole. If the state is to misinterpret this custom and attack it with such aggression, what faith should the majority of French Muslims have that similar accusations might not befall their customs? With a woman already denied citizenship last year because of her niqab, and this Parliamentary report recommending such immigration practices become standard, where is the security that less extensive hijab will not be next? The veil ban may have has been proposed as a positive means of integrating French Muslims, but it seems much more likely to cause harm given the aggressive and ignorant stance that politicians have taken to women's agency.

Jack Mohr was the communications intern at the NSRC. He is also a student in the Sexuality Studies MA program at San Francisco State University. For his graduate project, he organized The Bisexual Art Project, an art show that explored the different ways individuals understand and engage with their bisexuality.