Banning Islamic veils
| Author | Erica Howard |
| Published date | 01 September 2012 |
| Date | 01 September 2012 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1358229112464450 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Banning Islamic veils: Is
gender equality a valid
argument?
Erica Howard
Abstract
In political and popular debates, bans on the wearing of Islamic head scarves and veils are
often said to be necessary for the promotion of gender equality. In this article, I argue
that this is based on a stereotypical view of Islam and of Muslim women which ignores
the many different reasons why women wear headscarves and veils. I also argue that bans
are unnecessary and even counterproductive to achieving gender equality. For those
women who wear these garments because they freely choose to do so, bans are not
necessary to promote their equality. For those women who are pressured into wearing
headscarves or veils, bans could well work against promoting their equality, because they
could prevent them from getting an education and a job and could lead to their isolation
from society.
Keywords
Emancipation, gender equality, Muslim veils and headscarves, meaning of headscarves,
stereotypes
Introduction
Many European countries are debating whether to enact legislation prohibiting people
from wearing religious symbols in public places (Grillo and Shah, 2012: 12–13). These
debates, both at the political and at the popular level, often focus on whether Muslim
women and girls should be prohibited from wearing face coverings (niqabs and burqas)
School of Law, Middlesex University, London, UK
Corresponding author:
Erica Howard, Senior lecturer, School of Law, Middlesex University, The Burroughs, Hendon,
London, UK London, NW4 4BT United Kingdom.
Email: E.Howard@mdx.ac.uk
International Journalof
Discrimination and theLaw
12(3) 147–165
ªThe Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1358229112464450
jdi.sagepub.com
or, although to a lesser extent, headscarves (hijabs)
1
in public. In France, for example,
government employees, including teachers in state schools, are not allowed to wear any
type of religious symbol at work. France has also, in 2004, adopted a law in relation to
primary and secondary schools which prohibits the wearing of ostentatious signs or dress
by which pupils openly manifest a religious affiliation. The Islamic headscarf is usually
seen as such an ostentatious sign and thus girls are not allowed to wear the hijab at
school. The French ban on the wearing of garments covering the face in public places
came into force on 11 April 2011. The Bill proposing this ban passed in both lower and
upper house of the French Parliament with overwhelming majorities (BBC, 2010;
Guardian, 2010) and was declared constitutional by the Conseil Constitutionnel
(2010; Mahony, 2010).
In Germany, after the Federal Constitutional Court had held that States could ban
teachers from wearing hijabs as long as this ban was laid down in laws which complied
with the German constitution,
2
half of the States have indeed enacted such laws. Some
German States are now also planning to ban civil servants from wearing the burqa
(Impey and Mara, 2011).
In Belgium, a law of 1 June 2011 bans the wearing of clothing that covers or conceals
the face in whole or in part in public places. However, even before this law was adopted,
local police regulations in a large number of municipalities already contained similar
prohibitions (Vrielink et al., 2011).
In the Netherlands, a number of proposals have been discussed over the years, but
these did not lead to a legal ban (Van der Schyff and Overbeeke, 2011: 432–435). The
cabinet voted for a legal ban on the wearing of face covering clothing at the end of
January 2012, but it is not clear whether this ban will become law (DutchNews.nl,
2012), as elections have just taken place and the process of forming a new government
has just started. In Spain (Johnson, 2010), Italy and Austria (Dahmann, 2010), bills on
the wearing of the full face veil or face covering clothing are also being discussed, while
a majority of the population in the UK (Collins, 2011; Henessy, 2010) Denmark and
Switzerland (Dahmann, 2010) support a ban, although there do not appear to be any
immediate government plans for legislation in these countries.
Although the laws in France and Belgium and the proposed Bill in the Netherlands
ban all face-covering clothing, the bans are specifically aimed at the wearing of Muslim
face-covering veils. This is clear from the fact that, in the parliamentary and wider
popular debates, one of the recurring arguments for imposing a legal ban is that this is
necessary to promote equality between women and men and to fight the oppression of
(Muslim) women who are made to wear religious head or face coverings by men. The
hijab, burqa and niqab are described as symbols of the oppression of women and as
going against a woman’s fundamental rights and freedoms.
3
This argument that (Islamic)
veils go against equality of the sexes and, thus, against one of the fundamental values of
Western states, is probably the most widely used – not only by politicians, but also by the
media and in general popular discussion – to defend bans on hijabs,burqas and/or
niqabs. It is also an argument used by many feminists, who are in favour of bans as they
consider these necessary to emancipate Muslim women and girls. It has to be noted that,
although this argument is used in debates on all forms of Islamic scarves and veils,
face-covering veils are most strongly opposed as they are seen as particularly oppressive.
148 International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 12(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial