Le Pen refuses to wear a hijab

[DarlBundren]

I was wondering, from a consequential point of view, what do you think of Marine Le Pen's refusal to wear a hijab? Does it really help the women's cause against a misogynist state, as some have claimed, or is it an unnecessary deontological refusal? On the one hand, I think there could be some good pragmatic reasons to wear it, but on the other I guess it can be said to have a certain symbolic value. Any thoughts?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/23/marine-le-pen-refused-to-wear-a-headscarf-to-meet-with-lebanese-leaders/?utm_term=.d21a92b879c2

[NonZeroSum]

I was wondering, from a consequential point of view, what do you think of Marine Le Pen's refusal to wear a hijab? Does it really help the women's cause against a misogynist state, as some have claimed, or is it an unnecessary deontological refusal? On the one hand, I think there could be some good pragmatic reasons to wear it, but on the other I guess it can be said to have a certain symbolic value. Any thoughts?

Heya,

I did start a forum thread about Le Pen today - philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2974 - because this media stunt has seen her reach international news on possibly the biggest scale in her small political life.

This event has to be seen in the context of her presidential campaign, she chose to go to the country with the most polarised /systematically segregated government and country in the world, to gain support from French Christian dual citizens, and show a facade of foreign diplomatic experience. To which the latter she abandoned to create this stunt, and whip up support back home amongst nationalists.

It shows an ignorant unwillingness to visit and work with those countries that have customs restricting individual freedoms, I guess we should expect she will never visit a mosque or synagogue or Sikh temple and respect their customs either in order to heal national unity in times of crisis.

Just as with pussy riot being elevated to a tool to criticize Russia, spectacle should always be suspect for whom in power benefits from the controversy, it is not constructive activism, and does nothing to heal the divide of power between men and women.
- emptywheel.net/2012/08/20/pussy-riot-and-the-spectacle-of-protest/

Le Pen says as French president she would ban all religious symbols, including kippot
– jta.org/2016/10/18/news-opinion/world/le-pen-says-as-french-president-she-would-ban-all-religious-symbols-including-kippot

Marine Le Pen has arrived in Lebanon to find out that the Christians she thought were her allies aren’t on her side at all
- independent.co.uk/voices/marine-le-pen-national-front-france-far-right-lebanon-not-found-a7595131.html

[EquALLity]

I don't know much about her other than that she leads a terrible party and I probably disagree with her policies, but I completely support her not wearing the hijab, just like Michelle Obama didn't. Women's rights is more important than not offending Islamic governments. What's actually offensive is the hijab itself, which essentially blames women for being raped for not being "modest" enough.

I think it sets a bad precedent to wear the hijab, as if it's ok to chip away at civil rights because of religion.

[NonZeroSum]

Civil rights - Deontology
Hijab - Stunted cultural growth and/or only ethical recourse (piety movement) outside of non existant citizen rights.

An Introduction to Saba Mahmood’s Politics of Piety - A Macat Anthropology Analysis - youtube.com/watch?v=ZTBZm2X41qg

Michelle Obama had free reign to stay at home as first lady and never step a foot overseas or into a religious centre, Barack Obama wore the kippah in Israel, and his female diplomats wore the hijab to countries that expected it.

[DarlBundren]

I did start a forum thread about Le Pen today - philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2974 - because this media stunt has seen her reach international news on possibly the biggest scale in her small political life.

Sorry, I didn't see your thread. To be honest, I was more interested in the act itself. That is, I wondered if not wearing a hijab could be defended on a political/philosophical ground. I have little doubt that Le Pen used it to gain support amongst right-wing nationalists- I could not care less about what she does.

It shows an ignorant unwillingness to visit and work with those countries that have customs restricting individual freedoms, I guess we should expect she will never visit a mosque or synagogue or Sikh temple and respect their customs either in order to heal national unity in times of crisis.

I am not sure if we are talking about the same situation though. When I want to visit a synagogue, it is because I want to see the place. My having to wear a kippot is not a big deal for me and it's probably the right thing to do since it is so important for them. To draw an analogy, I know that indigenous Australians cannot talk about the dead and thus don't want to watch any photographs/ video recordings involving their people. Showing a disclaimer before tv programmes in which Aboriginal people may be featured is probably the right thing to do, then. It takes away three seconds of my time, but is of great importance to them.

I think that wearing a headscarf could be considered a good political decision if it were shown to result in good consequences. A good consequence, for example, could be being able to bridge the gap between two distant cultures. That would certainly be more useful than shutting the door on their nose only 'because we know better than wear a stupid hat'.

However, headscarves are a big deal in Iran. Many women have chosen not to wear them to protest against their government. So, I think it is still possible to argue that if an influential politician (whoever that is) chooses to do the same, they are effectively helping the movement.
http://mystealthyfreedom.net/en/

As far as I am concerned, the point is: If we are all concernd about how women are treated in Iran, is it best for our politicians to wear headscarves or not?

[NonZeroSum]

I think that wearing a headscarf could be consider a good political decision if it were shown to result in good consequences. A good consequence, for example, could be being able to bridge the gap between two distant cultures. That would certainly be more useful than shutting the door on their nose only 'because we know better than wear a stupid hat'.

However, headscarves are a big deal in Iran. Many women have chosen not to wear them to protest against their government. So, I think it is still possible to argue that if an influential politician (whoever that is) chooses to do the same, they are effectively helping the movement.
http://mystealthyfreedom.net/en/

As far as I am concerned, the point is: If we are all concernd about how women are treated in Iran, is it best for our politicians to wear headscarves or not?

I think its an incredibly blunt instrument that sets up a false cultural dichotomy. When visiting politicians take that action they're saying 'we think women's best route to freedom is secular revolution so they can start dressing like us', which can be incredibly detrimental to the diverse strategies women's rights groups are fighting in the country.

I'd just encourage you to familiarise yourself with the complexities of the on the ground situation and how these narratives can actually hurt community cohesion and political progress in the country.

It's the equivalent of nostalgia for Batista run banana republic Cuba, and plays right into the hands of the oppressive government about foreign aggressors.

Do Muslim women really need saving? Anthropological reflections on cultural relativism and its others
- Onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/aa.2002.104.3.783/full
Saba Mahmood: Religious Liberty, the Minority Problem and Geopolitics
- youtube.com/watch?v=5QYjo3VBmoc

[brimstoneSalad]

It's not just about women's rights, its about cultural respect when you come into somebody else's home.

Would you wear your shoes inside a Japanese house when the custom is to remove them, despite the custom in the U.S. being to leave them on?

I'm not saying people shouldn't challenge these ideas, and that they shouldn't be crushed if they're not rational, but maybe a diplomat isn't the best person to do it. Sometimes it's important to take a little indignity for the team and help sooth international relations. The receiving country could see something like that as a serious insult, and if it increases the chance of violent conflict, the small gesture at women's rights may not be worth the possible blood shed.

[DarlBundren]

It's not just about women's rights, its about cultural respect when you come into somebody else's home.

Yes, as I have said, if I were to enter a synagogue I would wear a kippot. This is arguably not the same situation though. As far as I know, Japanese people don't arbitrarily force their custom on a specific part of their population. If it was only black people that, against their will, were required to take off their shoes (and I happened to be one of them), then I would consider challenging said custom. Women don't want to wear hijabs. Would you eat chorizo if you were in Spain?

Sometimes it's important to take a little indignity for the team and help sooth international relations. The receiving country could see something like that as a serious insult, and if it increases the chance of violent conflict, the small gesture at women's rights may not be worth the possible blood shed.

Ok, this is what I meant when I wrote about 'pragmatic reasons' and 'bridging the gap'. The thing is, I am not sure if this is the case. Don't get me wrong, I think that, most of the time, the best thing to do is 'to wear that headscarf', but an argument could be made that not wearing it would be effective altruism. It is unlikely that that 'meeting' (or whatever that was) will not take place only because this female politician refused to wear a hijab. They will probably just send a male representative- These people are concerned about business. If that is the case, by refusing to wear it, you can kill two birds with one stone (horrible idiom).

Do Muslim women really need saving? Anthropological reflections on cultural relativism and its others
- Onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/aa.2002.104.3.783/full
Saba Mahmood: Religious Liberty, the Minority Problem and Geopolitics
- youtube.com/watch?v=5QYjo3VBmoc

I have read that abstract ( I cannot get full access to the article), but I have yet to watch the video. It's pretty long. Would you be able to sum up its message so as to make it relevant for this discussion, maybe?

When visiting politicians take that action they're saying 'we think women's best route to freedom is secular revolution so they can start dressing like us', which can be incredibly detrimental to the diverse strategies women's rights groups are fighting in the country.

I am not sure if I get what you mean. Are you arguing in favor of cultural relativism? Are you saying that slavery or cannibalism are just a matter of cultural diversity? These are genuine questions.

I am not imposing anything on those women. It's them who are rebelling against their custom. I don't want them to stop wearing their headscarves, I want them to have the possibility to choose if they want to wear them or not. I am not forcing them to drink coca cola, I am just saying that if that is what they want to do, then they can have it.

I remember one article in which Singer stood against the idea of separate seating for men and women on buses. I should read it again, but if I am not mistaken the point was that if Jewish law doesn't allow men to sit next to women, then they ( those men) can just avoid taking the bus. That way, religious freedom would be safe- if that is really what is at stake here.

[NonZeroSum]

It's not just about women's rights, its about cultural respect when you come into somebody else's home.

Yes, as I have said, if I were to enter a synagogue I would wear a kippot. This is arguably not the same situation though. As far as I know, Japanese people don't arbitrarily force their custom on a specific part of their population. If it was only black people that, against their will, were required to take off their shoes (and I happened to be one of them), then I would consider challenging said custom. Women don't want to wear hijabs.

'Some' women don't. I'd support you going and living with a punk community in Iran if you were a woman and flaunting the law in public and doing prisoner resistance / journalism, I just think setting up a meeting with the grand mufti knowing they will expect you to wear a head scarf and pulling that stunt as a foreign politician isn't good for that movement and sends all the wrong messages.

Actually on second thought you'd likely be bartered as a hostage of the revolutionary guard so don't go to Iran or North Korea.

Do Muslim women really need saving? Anthropological reflections on cultural relativism and its others
- Onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/aa.2002.104.3.783/full
Saba Mahmood: Religious Liberty, the Minority Problem and Geopolitics
- youtube.com/watch?v=5QYjo3VBmoc

I have read that abstract ( I cannot get full access to the article), but I have yet to watch the video. It's pretty long. Would you be able to sum up its message so as to make it relevant for this discussion, maybe?

Sorry I'm struggling a bit on tablet (dog broke the laptop) there's a PDF if you search the name of the paper, just linked the wrong one - org.uib.no/smi/seminars/Pensum/Abu-Lughod.pdf

This 3min video deals with the burqa and why its important in our supporting the activism of those throwing off the hijab, we don't ostracize those who do wish to wear it and do more harm than good, as I said earlier the piety movement can be women's only form of ethical local organising and holding men accountable when the state doesn't.

An Introduction to Saba Mahmood’s Politics of Piety - A Macat Anthropology Analysis - youtube.com/wath?v=ZTBZm2X41qg

Her next paper dealt with the limits of de-ontological minority rights struggles that the christian Copts of Egypt were engaged in which was causing tension with the Muslim brotherhood socialist conceptions of citizenship because one was pan-Arab and the other identifying with the liberal West. How the root cause was neo-colonial nationalist despots eroding the autonomous place Coptic society had under the caliphate and with that both groups had retreated into a divisive identity nationalism. The same way the piety movement is a moderating force where citizen rights had been eroded, so we shouldn't be quick to see throwing off the hijab as the key symbol to freeing women, it can be the opposite.

Saba Mahmood: Religious Liberty, the Minority Problem and Geopolitics
- youtube.com/watch?v=5QYjo3VBmoc

I think its an incredibly blunt instrument that sets up a false cultural dichotomy. When visiting politicians take that action they're saying 'we think women's best route to freedom is secular revolution so they can start dressing like us', which can be incredibly detrimental to the diverse strategies women's rights groups are fighting in the country.

I am not sure if I get what you mean. Are you arguing in favor of cultural relativism? Are you saying that slavery or cannibalism are just a matter of cultural diversity? These are genuine questions.

I am not imposing anything on those women. It's them who are rebelling against their custom. I don't want them to stop wearing their headscarves, I want them to have the possibility to choose if they want to wear them or not. I am not forcing them to drink coca cola, I am just saying that if that is what they want to do, then they can have it.

I'm saying if we're talking about symbolic spectacle protests we should be cognizant about what message we're sending, people visiting from another country making a statement about being allowed to be uncovered represent their home country for what those values produce, conservative people might see a superficial population obsessed with looks and selfies, so it becomes about a clash of cultures whether you like it or not. Add on top of that if you're a politician in a diplomatic role, you are making a statement that your secular government and private religion is far superior, all this comes together as a clash of civilisations that is more likely to produce the result of indignity and radicalise politics in the wrong direction.

I remember one article in which Singer stood against the idea of separate seating for men and women on buses. I have got to read it again, but if I am not mistaken the point was that if Jewish men don't want to sit next to a woman, then they can just avoid taking the bus. That way, they would be perfectly able to practice their religion- if that is really what is at stake here.

I agree that is the ideal, the symbol of orthodox Jews crowding the corridor of an airplane because they refuse to sit down next to women, even enclosing themselves in a plastic burqa certainly does them no favours.
- youtube.com/watch?v=BHm0N-3amek

[ModVegan]

It's not just about women's rights, its about cultural respect when you come into somebody else's home.

Would you wear your shoes inside a Japanese house when the custom is to remove them, despite the custom in the U.S. being to leave them on?

I'm not saying people shouldn't challenge these ideas, and that they shouldn't be crushed if they're not rational, but maybe a diplomat isn't the best person to do it. Sometimes it's important to take a little indignity for the team and help sooth international relations. The receiving country could see something like that as a serious insult, and if it increases the chance of violent conflict, the small gesture at women's rights may not be worth the possible blood shed.

I think shoes are a little different from hijabs, and to pretend that there is no difference is a straw man argument.

Le Pen's party and personal political views are a disaster, imho. But I kind of admire her decision not to wear a hijab. She's actually the perfect person to challenge the hijab, because no normal diplomat can be safe doing such a thing (friends who've worked in CDN foreign relations assure me that a hijab, though not required, is essential to avoid harassment.) So yeah, I admit to sort of liking the idea. It's probably the only thing she's ever done and ever will do that I can agree with.