alexist

I have to say, I do agree with Jack Straw. Some of the media coverage and comments has been appalling--frequently from people who obviously didn't read his statements carefully. First, he was referring only to the facial veil, not the hijab, so comparisons with the Sikh turban, Jewish kipa, etc are a false analogy. Second, he was referring to it in the context of face-to-face meetings--so the idiot letter-writer who said "does he ask people to take off the veil when speaking to him on the phone?" missed the point.

I am uncomfortable with the full veil, for both practical and philosophical reasons. First, it is extremely unnerving trying to speak to someone when you can't see their face (an Asian man said in today's Guardian that he felt similarly with people wearing sunglasses, and that's also true). But it's even more of a philosophical issue. I have no issues with religious modesty, but for me, the niqab isn't about that. If I wear long sleeves and a hat (as Orthodox Jewish women do), I'm being modest, but I'm not obscuring anything essential about myself. (The same would be true of women wearing salwar-kameez and a scarf.) It defines a line between private and public. With the niqab, a woman becomes anonymous and interchangeable, rather than an individual. Everything about her as a person is defined as private. Apologists call it modesty, but I don't see how it can be anything other than misogyny to say that anything individual or personal about a woman, but not a man, is unfit for public view.

Like Jack Straw, I would never presume to tell a woman she did not have the right to wear the religious garb of her choice. But he is also right that it sends a message. I don't know about separation between communities, but it does send a message about the place of women, and it is a legitimate topic of debate.

Forgot the oregano... this is what you get for clearing out your herbs and spices before a move!