This Again
Just in case you’re interested. Yet another argument about the French hijab ban at Crooked Timber, in which CT frames the issue as if all Muslims and people from majority-Muslim countries were opposed to the ban and only honky imperialists and totalitarian secularists were in favour of it. I shouldn’t be rude; the intentions are good; but there always is so much left out of this discussion, it gets up my nose. Never so much as a mention of Ni Putes ni Soumises, or the fact that a majority of Muslim women polled in France favour the ban – which you would think would be relevant to a discussion that’s premised on the idea that the ban is humiliating because it singles out a religion or ethnic group.
As always, though, there are some French commenters chiming in and setting CT straight, or at least trying to. Yabonn, who has tried before, and François. There was a memorable version of this discussion about a year ago when Rana, who unlike any of the anti-ban commenters had actually been made to wear the damn hijab as a child, told people what a joy that was. But did they listen to her? Not that I noticed. They just…don’t. One-eared.
Identity politics among hip young academics dies hard, doesn’t it?
Not one-eared, OB. Two ears – one for facts to go in, one for them to go out again without remark or acknowledgment.
*sigh*
Yeah. Sad but true.
in which CT frames the issue as if all Muslims and people from majority-Muslim countries were opposed to the ban and only honky imperialists and totalitarian secularists were in favour of it.
As with so many statements you make on this issue, Ophelia, that’s just not true. I made no such assertion and you won’t be able to point to a place where I did.
In other words, I reported on something I’d seen rather than endorsing its perspective! And, btw, I issued the following caveat: “Obviously, much of the impression the viewer gets will have been shaped by the editing decisions of the film-makers.”
When I speak with my own voice I make that clear, when I report what others are saying I also make *that* clear. And such reports don’t imply endorsement.
Nick S, there were 100 marks available to you for comprehension, and I’m sorry to say you scored 0.
Chris,
But I didn’t say you did make such an assertion, I said CT framed the issue as if, etcetera. That may be an unfairly weaselly way of putting it – but I put it that vague way because I was talking about a long-standing pattern rather than exclusively that post. It does seem to me that you consistently frame disagreement with certain practices within Islam as discriminatory treatment of all Muslims, while at the same time ignoring the Muslims and people of Muslim background who themselves make such criticisms.
It is true that you said ‘Obviously, much of the impression the viewer gets will have been shaped by the editing decisions of the film-makers,’ good, but you also followed it with ‘Nevertheless, the message I took was of the profound unwisdom of the measure’ – so surely it’s not quite true that you ‘reported on something I’d seen rather than endorsing its perspective.’
And my comment is also based partly on your answers to commenters in the thread. You take issue with me but not with the people who do quite explicitly accuse people who argue that the ban may have some merit, of racism, colonialism, intolerance, bigotry, etc. You ignore, as always, what I say about the Muslim and Muslim-background supporters of the ban.
I could see thinking the ban was still a bad idea, but not taking into account the fact that by no means all Muslims are opposed to it, is another matter.
‘Petty inspection, endless argument about the tiniest details of the garb worn by “those people”: humiliating and counterproductive.’
It’s the ‘those people’ thing that prompted my ‘as if all Muslims and people from majority-Muslim countries were opposed to the ban’. It’s just not a simple ‘those people’ issue, and it’s not honest to frame it that way.
Of course you’re under no obligation to do anything. But the non-mention, when the subject is surely highly relevant to what you’re posting about, is part of the overall long-term framing that I’m talking about – so I talked about it. I’m simply making a case that I haven’t distorted your way of framing the issue.
I remember the posts about the films. But you weren’t arguing against the hijab ban in those. When you are, I think you tend to oversimplify (as do a lot of people).
Chris – you seemed overly sympathetic to a fashionable minority view of hardline Islam which, if we continue to empower, will erode hard won women’s rights in our democracy and create a two tier system, disenfranchising the very vulnerable minorities we pretend to help.