Hysteria and the veil

2010-07-22 00:00

MONKEY see, monkey do. Soon after France’s National Assembly passed a law making it illegal to wear a full-face veil in public, British MP Philip Hollobone announced a private member’s bill recently that would make it illegal for people to cover their faces in public in Britain. Neither bill mentioned Muslims by name, of course.

Hollobone has previously called the Islamic veil “offensive” and “against the British way of life”, so we may safely assume that his bill is not aimed at people wearing motorcycle helmets. We can also assume that it will never become law, for British immigration minister Damian Green immediately replied that “telling people what they can and can’t wear, if they’re just walking down the street, is a rather unBritish thing to do”.

Good: the last thing anybody needs is for another European state to copy the French. But it cannot be denied that a great many Europeans feel profoundly uneasy when they see these shrouded, masked women moving silently in their midst.

The veil is not Islamic at all. Indeed, it predates all the Abrahamic religions. They all come from the Middle East, and that’s why they all — Jews, Christians and Muslims — used to be obsessed with female modesty.

The principle of modesty was a way of controlling the behaviour of women who had the power to upset the social order, so how poor women behaved didn’t matter. The early Mesopotamian laws ordaining the veiling of women applied only to the wives of powerful men. Several thousand years later, Greek, Roman and Byzantine upper-class women still went veiled, while their poorer sisters moved freely with their faces uncovered.

We cannot know what proportion of women in seventh-century, pre-Islamic Arabia went veiled, but until quite recently poorer and rural Arabian women, and especially Bedouin women, covered their hair but otherwise went unveiled. It seems a safe assumption that the situation was not much different in the Prophet’s time.

I do not presume to interpret the Qur’an, but its injunctions on veiling were simply an endorsement of existing social customs. I would also observe that most Muslim communities down through history have interpreted these customs as requiring the concealment of a woman’s hair but not her face.

So why have women in non- rich Muslim families living in major European cities now taken to wearing full-face veils or even burqas? Not a lot of women, to be sure: France estimates that only 2 000 women go about fully veiled, and the real numbers for Britain are unlikely to be much different. But why are they doing it at all? Two generations ago, their grandmothers almost certainly did not.

One reason is fear, on their own part or that of their husbands, that the majority society’s values are so powerful and seductive that good Muslims must be completely isolated from it. This also explains why you regularly see girls as young as two or three wearing hijab (i.e. with their hair completely covered) in Paris and London: their parents believe that the habit must start very early if it is to withstand the majority society’s influence.

A second reason is defiance: think of it as a nongay version of “we’re out and we’re proud. Get used to it.” And both anecdotal evidence and personal observation suggest to me that a large proportion of the fully veiled women in Britain — maybe as many as half — are actually recent converts to Islam who grew up in the dominant post-Christian culture. Same for France. Converts often get carried away.

So which part of this is a threat to public order? None of it, obviously. Why did a ridiculous law banning the full veil pass through the French parliament without opposition, whereas a similar bill will never reach the floor of the British House of Commons? Not because the French are more anti-Muslim than the British, but because they are the heirs of one of the great battles between religion and the secular state.

Britain hasn’t seen such a battle since the 17th century, and the official religion just gradually retreated to the sidelines of modern life without a fight. The fight was long, bitter and much more recent in France, so the French state takes public displays of religious allegiance a lot more seriously.

And what about Belgium, the Netherlands, Austria and Switzerland, where similar bans have been or are being discussed at national level? They should be ashamed of themselves.

• Gwynne Dyer is a London- based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.

Join the conversation!

24.com encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions.

24.com publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
Comments have been closed for this article.

Inside News24

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire 24.com network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.