OCR Text |
Show Hingkley Journal of Politics 2006 Unveiling Liberty Sarah Green This article addresses the long-standing debate between Western and Eastern feminists regarding Islamic veiling practices. This debate is, at its core, concerned with the possibility that veiling practices infringe on the liberty of Muslim women, an assertion made by Western feminists and vehemently denied by Eastern feminists. The author argues for a "Centrist" perspective regarding this issue. Centrism seeks to strike a balance between the extremes of the Eastern and Western perspectives, taking what is most valuable from each and creating a more complete theoretical framework from which to view the issue. By implementing the Centrist strategy, the author asserts, the first steps can be taken toward a cross-cultural feminist account of freedom, one that not only addresses veiling, but endless issues within various cultural societies. Introduction In late October of 1989, three young women attending a French public college outside Paris arrived at school wearing traditional Islamic headscarves. The Principal of the college was alerted to the situation and promptly responded, stating that while the headscarves could be worn between classes, they must be dropped to the shoulders during class. * he three young women refused and were barred from attend-lng any of their courses until they agreed to comply with the ^rective. Over the months following this incident, a divisive National debate emerged. The French Right warned of "immigrants overrunning France and ruining French culture" (Moruzzi, 1994). The French Left reasoned differently but reached the same conclusion; they emphasized the secularism °r French culture and asserted that wearing headscarves in Public institutions violated that secularism. Many intellectu-als> activists, and feminists joined the Left in advocating sec-ularism, but shifted the debate by asserting that "only the absolute rule of a national policy of secularism, by which the V°ung women . . . must abide . . . could save these women r°rn the tyranny of their fathers" (Moruzzi). Perhaps the most Ocal advocate of this position was prominent French femi-j^lst Katherine Badinter, who stated, "The veil, it is the sym-ol of the oppression of a sex . . . Putting a veil on the head, **ls is an act of submission. It burdens a woman's whole life" (Galeotti, 1993). , The "Affair of the Headscarf," as it became widely Hown, reinvigorated a debate that has been waging between estern and Eastern feminists for centuries. This debate is, at s core, concerned with the possibility that veiling practices ringe on the liberty of Muslim women; an assertion made V Western feminists and vehemently denied by Eastern fem- ists. Feminist perspectives on veiling were referenced by ponents on tne different "sides" of this debate as they pre- sented their respective cases. Consequently, the Affair not only brought feminist perspectives on cultural and religious practices, such as veiling, into mainstream political discussion, it also demonstrated the way in which feminist discourses could serve more than just a theoretical purpose. Feminism has perhaps most popularly been defined as "a movement to end sexist oppression" (Bell Hooks, 1984). This definition is widely accepted by feminists and often cited as the most appropriate; a definition that can be uniformly applied across divisions of culture, race and class (Bell Hooks). However, an issue arises when one begins to consider what constitutes "sexist oppression," who determines what qualifies as oppression, and once it has been decided, if those issues truly cross divisions in race, class and culture. This is a key consideration in the feminist debate regarding the cultural and religious practice of veiling, a topic debated since early colonialism that continues to be relevant today. From the beginning, feminists have been prominent in this debate. Over the years, it has developed into a truly divisive topic; positioning Western feminist theory against Eastern feminist theory. From the Western feminist perspective veiling is a clearly oppressive practice, one that is rooted in socialization and must be abolished in order to liberate Muslim women. Conversely, the Eastern perspective views the veil as a symbol and tool of liberation. Eastern feminists assert that criticisms of the veil are rooted in a culturally insensitive understanding of the practice, one that sanctions imperialism and refuses to accept cultural difference. These perspectives have dominated popular literature on this subject and feminists have largely adhered to one perspective or the other. However, it is important that feminists more thoughtfully consider the perspectives of Western and Eastern feminists before selecting which they will support. Are both positions overly simplistic? Do they fail to address the complexities of the issue? My assertion is that they do. The two sides of the 37 |