One defence offered by officials in Nice and other cities that are imposing a burkini ban is that it is about allowing women to wear what they freely choose to, and not what is imposed on them. I am in agreement with the idea that we should all freely choose how to clothe and express ourselves. However, this ignores the many constraints we all labour under.
My friends in IT and banking generally have to conform to a dress code at work - formal shirts and pants and shoes for the men, salwar kamees or saris for the women. There is some room for 'dressing down' in collar t-shirts or khakis especially on fridays, and a lot of people do seem to be able wear jeans fairly often, although usually not on a monday. In the advertising industry, it was clear who you were from your attire - creatives in jeans, tees, kurtas, account execs in formals, pre-press and production teams in cotton half-sleeved shirts, comfy trousers and chappals. In my own building, my Chinese neighbour and his wife generally wear smart casuals, as they're called, while the women in the Jain families wear saris with the pallu draped over their heads like hoods.
Not all these choices are as visibly erasing of personal identity as the hijab, true. And not all of them come with the dire consequences that face a woman flouting hijab in a fundamentalist Islamic society. But try showing up to your monday morning team meeting in bermuda shorts and a hawaii shirt, or to your job as a teller in a tube top and mini skirt. There will be consequences. Heck, look at how colleges in this city police their students' attire, especially the female students.
My point is that there is rarely any such thing as pure freedom of choice in what you wear. You are part of a society, a work culture, you have limitations that you can chose to follow or flout depending on your own level of privilege, daring or conversely your wish not to rock the boat or to respect certain norms. I personally don't understand respecting norms that restrict you, but I understand that it is a valid personal choice. However, choice is not the only factor determining your appearance. Often, it's safety and self preservation.
Given all of this, given the fact that we already dedicate too much public energy to regulating or deregulating womens' appearance, maybe a truly liberty-loving attitude would be to let people wear what keeps them comfortable in their own skins. France is not where the Islamic attitude to hijab will be changed and French lawmakers are not the ones who will change it. Organisations like My Stealthy Freedom and the Iranian men who have taken to wearing the veil as a protest and a show of solidarity might. Debate, dissent and dialogue in Islamic societies will only be fixed further into entrenched defensive positions if a tradition is seen as under attack from 'the West'. In short, I can think of no way in which non-Islamic authorities banning Islamic religious attire is justified or helpful, even as I echo the Nice officials' belief that everyone should be allowed to determine what they wear.
My friends in IT and banking generally have to conform to a dress code at work - formal shirts and pants and shoes for the men, salwar kamees or saris for the women. There is some room for 'dressing down' in collar t-shirts or khakis especially on fridays, and a lot of people do seem to be able wear jeans fairly often, although usually not on a monday. In the advertising industry, it was clear who you were from your attire - creatives in jeans, tees, kurtas, account execs in formals, pre-press and production teams in cotton half-sleeved shirts, comfy trousers and chappals. In my own building, my Chinese neighbour and his wife generally wear smart casuals, as they're called, while the women in the Jain families wear saris with the pallu draped over their heads like hoods.
Not all these choices are as visibly erasing of personal identity as the hijab, true. And not all of them come with the dire consequences that face a woman flouting hijab in a fundamentalist Islamic society. But try showing up to your monday morning team meeting in bermuda shorts and a hawaii shirt, or to your job as a teller in a tube top and mini skirt. There will be consequences. Heck, look at how colleges in this city police their students' attire, especially the female students.
My point is that there is rarely any such thing as pure freedom of choice in what you wear. You are part of a society, a work culture, you have limitations that you can chose to follow or flout depending on your own level of privilege, daring or conversely your wish not to rock the boat or to respect certain norms. I personally don't understand respecting norms that restrict you, but I understand that it is a valid personal choice. However, choice is not the only factor determining your appearance. Often, it's safety and self preservation.
Given all of this, given the fact that we already dedicate too much public energy to regulating or deregulating womens' appearance, maybe a truly liberty-loving attitude would be to let people wear what keeps them comfortable in their own skins. France is not where the Islamic attitude to hijab will be changed and French lawmakers are not the ones who will change it. Organisations like My Stealthy Freedom and the Iranian men who have taken to wearing the veil as a protest and a show of solidarity might. Debate, dissent and dialogue in Islamic societies will only be fixed further into entrenched defensive positions if a tradition is seen as under attack from 'the West'. In short, I can think of no way in which non-Islamic authorities banning Islamic religious attire is justified or helpful, even as I echo the Nice officials' belief that everyone should be allowed to determine what they wear.
No comments:
Post a Comment