title: The veil in the room

This is an article that needs little introduction. The “Islamic Veil” also known as the “Niqaab” or “Burka/Burqa” has become a controversial issue in politics and a common topic of debate. We’ll refer to the face veil as “Niqaab” in this article as that is the word generally used by Muslims.

Why?

Usually the argument for banning niqaab involves a combination of 3 points: Liberation, Security and Values.

1. Liberation: The argument that niqaab is a tool for oppression of women, “like a prison” and forced on Arab or Muslim women by their menfolk.
2. Security: The argument that niqaab is a way for people to conceal their identity and thus gives criminals an easy means of committing crime or that seeing the faces of these women is a matter of “public order”.
3. Values: [if all else fails] The argument that niqaab is against western values. Muslims should assimilate into their “new” homes culture and niqaab is a barrier to that.

Liberation

In my experience the amount of people who are forced to veil is a very small minority (in the west, the minority may be larger in the middle east but I have no experience there and these arguments are not made in reference to women in the middle east they are made in reference to Muslims in western countries).

I’ve met African-American converts, White American converts, Maori Converts, Pakistani Americans and immigrant Arabs who wear niqaab. By choice. Some married, some single, some married to converts themselves. All of them wear it because they either believe it is required by Islam or recommended by Islam and they all believe it is the highest form of protecting a woman’s modesty. Some even wear it against the wishes of their male family members. Imagine that!

Niqaab is rarely forced onto a woman a la Taliban ruled Afghanistan. In general, it is either a choice or a religious obligation. Expected? Maybe. Encouraged? Absolutely! But forced?

Women don’t wear it to respect their husbands, they wear it to respect their Lord (Allah/God) and follow His commandments for women to cover themselves “so they may be known as free and respectable women and not be annoyed” (annoyed sometimes translated as molested but I don’t know Arabic enough to elaborate in it’s possible meanings, you’d have to actually look at the root and meaning of the Arabic word to get an accurate idea).

I am a muslim woman who wears hijab (scarf without face veil) and my husband initially tried to convince me NOT to for fear of discrimination until I insisted it was something I was obliged to do discrimination or no discrimination. I was raised in the west and learned Islam independently and converted as a teenager, I wasn’t “brainwashed” and for people to suggest that “most” or all women who veil are is quite frankly, insulting to our intelligence and dehumanizing to Muslim women.

As many have pointed out before me, isn’t telling Muslim women what they CAN’T wear, the same oppression as these hypothetical husbands and fathers who force their women to veil?

Muslim Women in general are no more the poor oppressed, brainwashed, sheep that many anti-hijab/niqaab campaigners make us out to be than western women are the scantily clad bimbos that some muslims make them out to be.

Let’s be honest here, the veil ban is not about Women being forced to wear it, it’s about non-Muslims being uncomfortable about it.

A leg to stand on? The “Liberation” argument is not entirely inaccurate per sé. As in any community, there are Muslim Women who are forced into things, who are abused, who may be brainwashed, who need help and liberation from some sort of oppression and I am whole heartedly for providing resources and support for the women who need it. But this is not an issue unique to Muslim communities and I think the effort and resources that are being used to ban the face veil ought be used to provide more support and resources for abused women across the board. We may be busy arresting a husband who we believe forced his wife to wear a veil while next door a woman is in need of assistance that she is not able to get.

Security

I have spoken to women with the face veil, I’ve spoken to people over the phone, I’ve spoken to the backs of peoples heads while I sit in the back of the car (and yes, even the back of a veiled womans head!), I’ve spoken to drive through speakers, I’ve spoken to people wearing bike helmets and scarves in winter over their faces, I’ve spoken to people with hospital masks on, I’ve spoken to people in other rooms, I’ve spoken to autistic people who didn’t recognize body language or facial expression. In every case I had no problem communicating with them and understanding what they are saying, their tone of voice and body language.

Why not have a female employee check the identity of a woman in niqaab who wishes to enter a bank? It’s a very small minority, something like 30 people in the whole of Belgium for example, so this really can’t pose very much of an issue or, indeed, a security threat at all. If someone is acting suspicious then it will be picked up on by an experienced security professional whether they have their face in view or not. Wouldn’t someone already be looked at with more suspicion and caution in the current social & political climate if they were covering their face anyway?

This is not really about security or the veiled bank robber, this is about YOUR emotional reaction to something that you have preconceived notions about (muslim women who are veiled), and you are responsible for that reaction. Not us.

A leg to stand on? While it’s not widespread by any stretch of the imagination, there have been people who have used niqaab for negative or criminal gain and there have been women who would have benefited from being more easily identified. There are real and valid points to this argument both for the security of others and the security of the women in niqaab, but are these security issues substantial enough to require a total ban on an item of clothing that many women believe is required? Is this more of a cultural trust issue “I can’t see your face, so I can’t trust you”? Or is this more an issue of discomfort and slightly xenophobic panic?

Values

When all else fails “it’s against french/belgian/canadian/western values”.

Modesty? Privacy? Religion? Differences? Which values are we talking about here? Specifically?

To be fair, I’m a woman who grew up in the west, I understand to a degree the discomfort with something that seems SO different and SO foreign. I understand to a degree the cultural trust issues that can come up when someone is covering their face -which is perceived to be the whole the identity of the person. But let’s be specific here, which values are you talking about? Aren’t our values individual and often based on our religious beliefs? What about my values as an individual? What about my right to choose which parts of my body are private?

A leg to stand on? Clearly from my above paragraph, I do believe the trust part of this has a leg to stand on (which is more a security issue than a values issue but the line blurs). However to suggest the reason for banning something is something as vague, individualistic and broad as “values” is, from where I’m sitting, a cop out.

Special shout out to Mum for the honest discussions and debates we’ve had on this issue that helped my perspective and Jennifer who was a voice of reason and an open mind on the Human Rights Watch discussion that inspired this article.