Ban The Burqa?

How, exactly? Make it illegal by passing a law? Can that really be done in a country that celebrates its civil freedoms? Should it be done? The sight of a burqa may be offensive to some in that it may leave an impression that the wearer chooses to sequester herself, to be kept apart from those around her. That is one interpretation. Another, of course, is that wearing the burqa is a woman's way of asserting the extent and depth of her religious conviction. Also, that this is a traditional, cultural custom, common enough in some regions of the Muslim world.

But of course we do not inhabit a Muslim world. This is Canada. Yet on the other hand, the country freely welcomes immigrants from all over the world. Personally, I don't feel affronted on seeing a woman garbed in such a way, although that hasn't been often. More often I see women and girls wearing a hijab, just the head covering. And I have seen a woman wearing the full body covering and a partial niqab, with only the eyes revealed. That appeared to me to be her choice, and it didn't make me uncomfortable, merely curious.

One makes eye contact, or not. It did appear that though I was willing, the other was not. And that too was her prerogative. The Muslim Canadian Congress recently suggested through a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government that the burqa and any other face-covering veils be banned in Canada. Doesn't seem likely that would occur. There doesn't seem any real reason for steps like that to be taken, since it does impinge on peoples' human rights to wear what they will. One could point to women who are scantily dressed and most inappropriately so, and recommend banning slatternly fashions, as well.

We would not, but why point to one and not the other. Perhaps it's offensive for many to see how young women flaunt themselves excessively rather than dress modestly, but we don't insist on a fashion moratorium for young women, pleased with their bodies and eager to reveal as much of them as they can. We simply shrug it off as commensurate with bad taste and poor social manners. If we can identify the wearing of full body and head coverings with the subjugation of women, then this is a social malady and a deplorable one, if fundamentalist Muslim men insist that their womenfolk cover completely as a way of controlling them.

But how are we to know? There are many instances, common enough, in mainstream society where women are treated horrendously by the men with whom they live, and there is no religious significance to their maltreatment. This is a manifestation of a socially maladjusted relationship between a demanding, controlling and sometimes brutal man and his hapless companion. It is this type of relationship, where men prey on their women companions and inflict psychological and physical pain on them that is the insult to society. Not that this will not occur also in religious households.

Attempting to legislate against outer manifestations of one's faith through the clothing worn by women in particular, is unfair and undemocratic. We would prefer new Canadians to adapt to the values that Canadian society views as normative, and, in the final analysis, to blend in with the greater society, even while maintaining cultural and traditional values as well. But this takes time and patience and a willingness and commitment on the part of the new immigrants to accept the broader Canadian values.

In the final analysis, there will never be many Muslim women who wear a complete body and head covering. And eventually, even that small number may ultimately disappear, as a temporary anomaly even in Muslim society where most women who adopt distinctive Muslim clothing, prefer to simply wear a headscarf to distinguish themselves as orthodox in their outlook on their religion. Not overlooking the fact that many young women choose to do so, in defiance of the mainstream society in which they live. That too can be a fashion statement. A political one, to be sure.