Hilarie: Should burkha be banned from our streets as well?

Jun 27 2009 by Hilarie Stelfox

I FIND IT puzzling that there are women in the 21st century, living in the Western world, who would choose to adopt a dress code that effectively removes them from normal society.

But the wearing of the burkha, if embraced willingly and without coercion, is a Muslim woman’s right. As such it could be said to be deserving of the same respect as every other hard-won right for women.

France’s President Sarkozy, however, says the burkha is not a religious symbol but a sign of ‘subversion’ and ‘debasement’. He sees it as a fundamentalist tool that has no place in modern society. French politicians, supported by their premier, are calling for a commission to study whether the burkha should be banned because it is not compatible with the country’s gender-equality and secularism laws.

France has already banned religious symbols from public schools, including the burkha, in a move that caused widespread controversy.

The burkha is man-made in more ways than one. When questioned about Islamic dress codes, an Imam once told me the Koran specifies that both men and women should dress ‘modestly’ and there is no religious requirement to cover the face and hands.

Modesty is important, he said, so that the passions of men should not be inflamed by the sight of beautiful hair or bare legs.

And there we have it. Because men cannot control their animal passions women, like the young mother I saw in Greenhead Park the other day attempting to eat a packet of crisps under her headdress, have to go around clad in a hideous black robe. If there is a creator I’m sure that he, or she, never wished such a fate for his, or her, creations.

There is only one argument FOR the wearing of a burkha:

l If it is the genuine heart-felt choice of a woman to shield herself from normal society as an extreme form of religious expression.