Back to blog

In British schools, the wearing of the hijab by young girls is an explosive issue

See blog

Readers' comments

Reader comments are listed below. Comments are currently closed and new comments are no longer being accepted.

Sort:

ashbird in reply to Houshu

I am thinking some religion (they exist!) whose garb is nudity. So for one day in a year, everybody in the community should go nude just to demonstrate their "tolerance" for this religion.
.
This is what gives "diversity" a bad name - (1) Put the cart before the horse; (2) the horse is a fake horse made of plastic (as another commenter pointed out, the costume is not even mandated by Islam).
.
I think Ms Khan should herself eat pork for one day in a year - bacon for breakfast, ham sandwich for lunch, and barbecued babyribs for dinner. Washed down by a jug of vodka. Just one day in a year.

ashbird

It is really sad that both sides would go to such extremes.
.
Will a "Buff" (no link, this is not an ad) work for a compromise? What is the fight all about really in the end?
.
It does seem to me all religious law aside, costume is the most compromisable part when people have to live together. Why the resistance to do as majority in the host country do? If you don't respect the host culture, why should it respect you?
.
Do they wear the head gear and whole body gear in the sauna too?
.

Swiss Reader

The hijab isn't even mandated by Islam. All the Koran says is that women should dress decently so they wouldn't be molested - quite reasonable advice which I have given my daughter repeatedly, too. The insistence on the hijab is rather a symbol of the most reactionary sects of Islam, a symbol of female subjection and also of an assertive anti-Western ideology. For adult citizens, it's protected under freedom of speech; but in school such symbols have no place. Children shouldn't be educated for a career as future martyrs.
.
Besides, I believe it would also make sense to prohibit the wearing of such symbols for grown-up refugees. I would favour a very open and liberal policy towards individual migrants, but at the same time insist that they show their willingness to integrate by dressing in a way which is considered polite in their host country.

ashbird in reply to sanmartinian

sanmartinian,
.
I think the issue is one of identification and self- identification . The wearing of the religious gear, or not wearing, is fused with this identification.
.
It is a messy thing to interfere with a person's self-identification, any person's.
.
In the context of a clash between two cultures, the utter inflexibility of both clashing parties in what each identifies with is the stuff over which blood is spilt and wars are fought.
.
Ultimately, the fight is the tip of an iceberg. The iceberg that asks: who has dominion and control over whom.
.
As we know, a few millennia down, Man has not resolved that Q.
.
In America, they fight is over who should be blessed by the Court to use which public bathroom when Nature calls.
.
What is fought over appears petty and stupid. The meaning is far from. It concerns none other than an existential Q of earth-shattering proportions for winner and loser alike. This is no exaggeration. The present case proves it
.
The only solution is compromise, IMHO.

Houshu

"Ms Khan’s aim is to “foster religious tolerance and understanding” by encouraging women who don’t normally cover their heads (non-Muslims or non-hijabi Muslim women) to try wearing the garment for just one day."
.
For the sake of diversity, another day, maybe 6 months apart, could be designated as the 'no hijab day', when normally hijabbed women can let their hair down, so to speak, for just one day.

ashbird in reply to sanmartinian

Dear sanmartinian,
.
I am entirely right only "twice"? I should think every single time. :)
.
Kidding aside, I think the problem here is garb and dignity have become FUSED for this band of Muslims.
.
Irrational "fusing" happens all the time. Not just for Muslims. Usually, the bigger the brain, the bigger the mind, the bigger the heart, the less "fusion" takes place [Hand size has got NOTHING to do with it, indeed potentially a handicap].
.
Even then, the absence of fusion is not 100%. We all have prejudices. What matters is how utterly inalterable it is in the face of what's real.
.
Nor can you force the fusion to un-fuse. As a person who knows science and math, you know the power unleashed by Nuclear Fission. Right? No less awesome than Nuclear Fusion. [I wish @BlueAsgard would join us to talk about this at greater length]
.
And that's the problem in all fights that trace their genesis to an institutionalized Religion.

R77wYfR8Qw

This kind of cultural diversity is similar to continental Europeans demanding permission to drive on the right side of the road in UK.
Certain cultural practices are incompatible with the host's cultural norms. They only work if whole population accept one norm. If one insists on maintaining old habits, they better go back home.

sanmartinian in reply to ashbird

to ashbird on the Ugly American
.
What a horrid experience!
.
We all know those people are actually sick, but some sicknesses are beyond our kindness or even indifference. All we are capable of is to avoid hate, and even that needs an effort.

ashbird in reply to Swiss Reader

Hi Swiss Reader, I read your reply post to sanmartinian.
.
Needless to say I agree with you the garb a person wears, whether intended or not, conscious or not, represents a political statement. This extends to a rebellious teenager’s dyeing his/her hair electric green, pink, purple or Dracula black. Or sporting the Mohawk look (now passé). Or some in the LGBT (important note: no judgment implied here whatsoever) community wearing “coded” looks to designate their political views on LGBT rights, etc.
.
In more mundane settings and contexts, what we wear tells a lot about ourselves, in ways both obvious and subliminal. In this regard, sometimes the statements could be misleading. Once many years ago, I was a Republican, for example. I didn’t know anything about politics, let alone American politics (still don’t). I registered myself as Republican because I liked (or aligned myself with) good haircuts and clean clothes v. unwashed shags and “stoned” looks. I learned the worthwhile lesson of “You can’t tell a book by its cover!”
.
___________
.
Now a really important point re the Swastika sign. Please pay close attention .
.
First, a link to show the difference between the Hindu/Jainism/Buddhist [H/J/B] sign and the Nazi sign -
.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/49337086@N07/4525274963
.
The Nazi’s twisted the swastika into a symbol of hate from the H/J/B sign standing for the concept of “One under Heaven (not the Christian conception “heaven”, simply means the Roof of the Universe, if you will - obviously this is not a technical translation for a Theology Journal in academia, but will suffice for purposes of this conversation). In Buddhism, this also stands for “Compassion for ALL) .
.
Note the H/J/B sign has the arms pointing right, and a counterclockwise “saubistika” paired up to portray opposites (a very Iching conception of the Universe. But this one needs a few treatises. So I’ll stop here) . The Nazi reversed the direction of the points .
.
There was an idiot on TE a couple of months back who posted to tell me I couldn’t tell a Swastika from a Hindu/Jainism sign when I reported in a post that in the 2 months following Trump’s election, the Nazi Swastika sign was carved using diamond cutting blades into the windshields of cars known to be owned by Chinese (in a very affluent town in Northern California) , and windows of Asian Churches. The vandalism spread to as far as the Wine Country in further north and Orange County in the south. The idiot continued to troll me for months and called me first a “dead bird in a trash can found with a cigar on its side” (about umteen times of this repeated) and finally a “prostitute” in the tradition of “Suzie Wong”. And the latest: “You hate your own skin” (quite a tour de force in Freudian PROJECTION) Such is how depraved some (“some” means “not all”) of these 2018 Trump Supporters are. And they refuse to be called Racists - what scum! Too scummy even for the sewer! Fortunately, the real Republican I know in real life are nothing like that. Though now I am in no way a Republican for the simple reason I do not see eye-to-eye with the person the party elected.
.
Speaking of Socrates and Confucius…. I had, prior to TE, never met a single Ugly American in my life, and I have lived in America for 30 years. I had thought that was only a movie. Suddenly they all come to the fore on Stage TE in 2016, 2017, 2018. Uncouth in every which way imaginable - in mind, in brain, in heart, in simple social manners. We’ll see what else they can come up with next - Proud to be Nazi’s, no doubt.

ashbird in reply to BAZEE

A great post on the subject, Sir/Madam. Thank you so much. You must post more often on Erasmus to share with us your views. They have facts in them and they make a lot of sense.
.
I in particular agree with 3 points you raised -
.
(1) The resultant vicious circle of exclusion by the donning of a garb which Non-Muslims would look at with perhaps bewilderment, perhaps amusement, perhaps fear. In think when an immigrant settles in a host country, he/she has at least half the burden to contribute to a an acceptance that is 2-way, not 1-way, for assimilation to work. To insist on looking so different by the clothes the person wears countervails the effort of this contribution. In the case of a head-to-toe black robe with a slit open barely wide enough for the eyes to look out but not anyone else to look in, FEAR is a very natural reaction. Many armed bank robbers wear masks just like that, with no robe below hiding any weapon if there is a weapon. I know I could not bring myself to speak with a woman covered in that way. And I am a woman.
.
(2) The perpetual *inbreeding* engendered by the culture through an iron-clad conception of male-and-female relationship is simply not *adaptive* in the scheme of Natural Selection and Evolution [I assume in foregoing sentence knowledge of what Natural Selection is and what Evolution is - there are readers on TE who do not know - my reply is not written for their reading].
.
(3) The women in the society, generations after generations, are kept in the name of a religious creed, marinated as pickles in vinegar in the belief that they must always do the biddings of men, because men are apriori superior in brain, mind, heart, and limbs - in short from head to toe. This marinade is not healthy. It is toxic. The apriori presumption has been proven false too many times, and over and over again in the history of civilzations everywhere. Only a true (or the malingering) idiot - male or female - will buy into that belief. Falsehoods clung to as God-written (literally) Gospel is unhealthy for a society. Period. And, btw, This single concept has got NOTHING to do with "Feminism", a dumb "what's trending" label thrown around that has no meaning, or if it does, has long ago strayed away from the concept embodied in Women's Suffrage and Equal opportunity to Eduation.
.
Lastly, I could not agree more with your conclusion" "These two points need to stand out as a heavy cost to a society - (Australia) - that has a good welfare system in place ".
.
Please add or subtract if I misread your post or read it less than accurately.

ashbird in reply to Swiss Reader

SR, Couldn't be better said.
.
I also favor prohibiting the wearing of such "symbols" for grown-up as well - at least in public, or, in what is known by a slightly more archaic term: "the commons".
.
Inside their places of worship - the Mosque - by all means, wear whatever their whatever dictates.
.
It is so impolite to cover up the whole face leaving a slit for the eyes so that no one could see your face, while you see everyone else's face. I just cannot see how that could be justified, religious or otherwise.
.
I think the "symbol" is simply a provocative gesture - provoking a fight, that is. It is simply wrong. Not acceptable. Period. Tolerance is a 2-way street.
.

ashbird in reply to Enders Shadow

Thanks for you feedback, @Endows.
.
I am not understanding what you are saying here.
.
I was simply saying the insistence on not changing anything in one's own expression of religiously ingrained culture as members of a mass migration to a host culture simply puts the host culture through an unseemly burden of having to bend more than it could bend to accommodate the new-comer culture. That really is all. No judgment, as far as my statement goes, is passed on whose belief is more right or less right than the other.
.
That is all I am saying.
.
Stripped to our underwear, we all look the same. A belief resides in the heart, not on the skin. Certainly not on what one wears.

ashbird in reply to sanmartinian

sanmartinian,
.
I answer to your replies by clicking on your posts only. I no longer read all the posts in a thread, time being scarce in my heavy work schedule.
.
Re Feb 6th, 14:11 reply, I think "hate" does not enter the equation in the stimulus-repsonse chain when one has figured out enough things in life .
.
It goes something like this - If a person "feels rich", the need to hate the poor simply does not arise.
.
Sages over the ages all told us that gem of a piece of wisdom. Folks in the order of Adolph are people who are severely "damaged" human beings. The damage evinces in their profound immaturity and insecurity as a person. These folks could be 90 years old. But emotionally they are pre-toilet trained. That really is all.
.
I shall close with this final comment my thoughts on the subject. Thank you for all your responses.

ashbird in reply to sanmartinian

sanmartinian,
.
Re quarreling - worse than boring, it is not a good use of time.
.
Re Chaplin and "The Dictator" - Chaplin was a man ahead of his time. Funny how decades later, the country that rejected him invited him to return to receive and Oscar. The man was so gracious he thanked his once mean enemy. About your local TV, I guess I must learn some Portuguese, which I am sure I wouldn't be able to at this point, or even if I could, too little too late!
.
Re laughter, laughter is the ultimate trumph over tears. Most people who can laugh know it. Listen to a Mozart Sonata played by Horowitz. In the pantheon where these folks reside, that is a common language.
.
Re tragedy, "That which doesn't kill you makes you stronger" - sages over the ages across the globe all left word to that effect.
.
Let's laugh plenty and be joyful. for we have overcome much.

ashbird in reply to sanmartinian

sanmartinian, I read your reply post to Swiss Reader. Once again, it's just lovely the way you reduced Man to its Orginal Copy as made on Day 1, Time 0.
.
I never understood why people spend so much time quarreling about things that aren't worth quarreling about. I think the quarrels have something to do with overfed stomachs, underfed brains and therefore idle minds trying to look busy with fights of the hooligans, by the hooligans and for the hooligans.
.
A note on "if people laughed..." (the last sentence) - I think many do. I posit had there not been Adolph, there would not have been Groucho. And what fun he was. We just need to make more of Groucho. I think that is the moral responsibility of a post-modern Man.

sanmartinian in reply to ashbird

ashbird, quarrelling is definitely one of the oldest sports around.
.
Pity, it is so boring. If at least it were as exciting as curling I'd pay more attention to it.
.
Groucho was a genius. And Charlie Chaplin with his film "The Dictator" was priceless.We even had a local version but our TV doesn't have a great worldwide projection and it went unnoticed.
.
Pity again, they all laughed and made us laugh only after Hitler had launched the war. If they managed to do it 10 years earlier they might have saved us from a tragedy.

ashbird in reply to BAZEE

YES!! *Equality* is the best thing anyone can leave behind, not just for daughters, but for sons too. In short, for Man, in the grand scheme of things.
.
A note on being a daughter and a woman - since I am a woman, I am my mom's and dad's daughter, and my man's woman. Keeps me enough busy and happy.
.
My view is equality between man and woman does not mean a woman needs to act like a man. That, at the outset, is saying "man is better"! There is no foollery more complete than that! As a woman, I say love our womanhood as women and appreciate men as men. That is is what gender equality is about. No need for either side to launch WWIII against the other. When a person doesn't engage in nonsense fights like that, the person frees up infinitely more time to better him/herself. But of course, that is not a misogynist's world view. A misogynist cannot get it up except by pushing a woman down - that is the sum and substance of his so-called manhood. (They, of course, also forgot they were given birth to by a woman. Very problemtic minds they have, IMHO).
.
All best to your daughters.

Swiss Reader in reply to sanmartinian

Sanmartinian, may I try to answer from a different viewpoint?
.
Sometimes, fashion can become a political statement. E.g. the swastika is an old and innocuous symbol of Hinduism and Buddhism; but it wouldn't be appropriate for a Buddhist to wear a conspicuous swastika on his neck when visiting Israel.
Also, brown is a nice colour, but I wouldn't like to see groups of young men wearing uniform brown shirts in Swiss streets.
.
In the same way, wearing a kind of headgear which is specifically prescribed by sectarians who kill girls for the crime of going to school is no longer just a matter of fashion. Covering a woman's head isn't a matter of religion either, as it's not mandated by Islam as such, only by certain sects which unfortunately have gained undue influence due to their supply of petrodollars. It has become a political statement and should therefore be treated in the similar way as wearing swastikas and brown shirts - protected free speech, yes, but not really to be propagated in schools.
.
Such a stance is not anti-Islamic by the way - I have Muslim friends who would welcome it, as they are rather annoyed by the identification of Islam in general with its most reactionary sects.

ashbird in reply to Enders Shadow

Perhaps this might further help elucidate my thought on the subject, although the circumstance and situation involved not young pupils in UK as this Erasmus article reports on.
.
In the college I attended in US in my time, a very exclusive private college (I included this bit info for its contextual significance) there were a bunch of Interanational Students. They were from East Asia and Europe. In terms of religious faith, no one ever asked anyone what religion they practiced. On an ordinary school day, everybody wore the typical American jeans and T-shirts to class. A sweater and coat when the weather was cold. Once a year the school held a Special Day of Celebration called International Students Day, which included an evening ball. All foreign or international students were invited to wear their representative "costumes" of the culture they came from. And we did. No one raised any fuss. Everybody enjoyed it. Indeed, I think the occasion turned out to be a match-maker for a couple of interfaith and interrace couples who have remain married to this day according to alumni Newsletter. I submit to you a lot of things I am seeing happening I have never seen before. Either time has gone backward, or TE forum is a very very strange place.