Your Proposal Is Acceptable 1

A forum for Blog Community #1 of CSCL 1001 (Introduction to Cultural Studies: Rhetoric, Power, Desire; University of Minnesota, Fall 2011) -- and interested guests.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Agency or Oppression? The SECULAR debate surrounding religious wear in France



A young Muslim girl enters a French primary school wearing her hijab while preparing for daily studies, with more than a bit of apprehension. Except, more than likely she doesn't
. Her punishment for refusal to remove the garment: suspension or expulsion.

In March of 2004, a law already tacitly supported by prior legal arrangements was effected baring any "ostentatious" worn display of religious symbol in public primary and secondary schools. An extension of this body of law was enacted in 2011 prohibiting the wearing of the more concealing
burqa and niqab in any public place. Implicit are myriad beliefs of the administrative and social spheres in France, of most pertinence: the principle of secularism. Separation of state and church has been a legal contract in the country since 1905; however, its roots can be traced back in many respects to the thought and observations of French atheists and enlightenment thinkers that preceded the French Revolution and formation of the French Republic. As secular thought has matured and produced fruit, in both a real and philosophical sense, it has been increasingly normalized for its usefulness and is more or less culturally practiced in most industrial and Western nations. Focused on the individual as a body of agency, scientific inquiry, intellectual curiosity, "human" rights, and social equality, secular ideals are internalized within the structure of modern government and activism. Infrastructure, products, innovations, law, recreation, and art has all been a product and producers of secular culture. It's quite clear that these ideals have produced what can be considered bodily practices as well--One can quite readily recall the disgust with which certain atheist enlist their faces when presented with an item of religious value or when prompted to rationalize faith, or conversely, when a religious zealot intensely defends his or her belief for the sake of making it seem reasonable or equitable. I would argue that this "principle of secularism" aptly frames both sides of the hijab debate in France and all support or dissent from outside the nation; a majority of both the support and opposition rest their arguments in terms of violations of freedoms or liberty. In our modern world, people interact with such frequency and density that ample consideration is not always given to the significance of certain cultural symbols in determining group or individual identity, but simply as a reduced and equated idea that any person should be able to determine: think 'Universal Human Rights'. In reviewing the "scarf law," as it has been popularly acclaimed, and its sympathizers and opponents, it would be utterly impossible to argue that these supposed secular ideals are felt and lived universally. Huge inconsistencies in the perception of agency and social equality exist between those in favor of the ban on religious articles and those opposing it, and even within both camps. Certain feminists believe the hijab a form of female oppression and patriarch traditionalism, they feel most women do not actively choose to be veiled, but are societally pressured. Furthermore, there is the belief that this societal pressure is so deeply internalized, that the voluntary choice of a woman to veil herself would not actually be free--this describes the docile body. To them, agency is restored to women in the ban on "ostentatious" religious display. Meanwhile, other opponents counter that many women choose the veil freely, and that it should not be academically determined that this freedom is not authentic. Still other Muslims are taking up the veil in France and other countries globally to show respectability and solidarity with their faith siblings; this behavior is quite new and is seen more often in countries with secular governance, strongly suggesting that the modern debate over the hijab is more secular than religious, more related to identity and less to tradition. It should also be mentioned at this time, that the law mainly affects youth in primary and secondary schooling across France. A political propaganda motive can be read into the scenario. My main question: Do secular ideals contribute to a dulling of cultural expression worldwide? Is a universal 'religion of secularity', per-se, determinable? What implications does the naturalization or docile acceptance of secular ideals have on modern societies? What good? What bad? I would suggest that secular, institutional ideals do necessarily dull, or at least transform, cultural expression wherever they are present. In this case, the very nature of the debate regarding the propriety of female youth Muslims wearing traditional hijab in schools has been framed in a secular code, resulting in the reproduction of the hijab as an item of cultural identity and not as an internal cultural significance. Moreover, the debate is far removed from individual stories of the women who choose the veil, but hinges on the secular right to wear the veil. The risk in accepting secular ideals as "natural" law is that as with any other body of law it carries it's agenda more or less 'veiled'--no pun intended. The secular will always be very good at rationing, providing equal guidelines, accepting individuals as the main unit of society, and improving technology. In the balance, though, lies cultural expression, creativity, unpredictability, and progress. These elements in my view are also essential for the happiness and success of us Earth people. So what's the balance?

No comments:

Post a Comment