The French rightly cop their share of criticism for everything from their hostile hospitality to their wartime surrender habit; as a member of the George Bush administration once noted: “Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion.”
But credit where it’s due; France must be applauded, and I would argue even emulated, in the way it has banned dehumanising Muslim garb, such as burqas and niqabs, that covers a woman’s face. Recently, the European Court of Human Rights upheld the burqa ban after a French woman, who is a devout Muslim, challenged the law for being discriminatory and violating her freedom of religion and expression.
The court backed the country’s law and found that they were justified on the grounds of social cohesion with the judges noting that “the face played a significant role in social interaction”.
The decision has led to a great deal of enraged bleating from some left-wing or “progressive” quarters, including Amnesty International France, but the decision is final and there are no avenues to appeal it. It is a decision that should be celebrated by women everywhere but sadly many feminists, including those in Australia, prefer not to tackle misogyny if it is Muslim-inspired.
So it was heartening to see the international Ligue des droits des femmes (League of Women’s Rights) welcome the judgment as a “victory for secularism and women’s rights”.
France, which has a substantial Muslim population, has led the way in banning full-face veils, with former conservative president Nicolas Sarkozy introducing the controversial law in 2010. The policy remains popular and is fully backed by current president Francois Hollande and his ruling socialist party. Belgium followed soon after with a burqa ban in 2011. Parts of Switzerland, Spain and Italy have enforced similar bans as other countries and regions consider following France’s lead.
The French attitude to Islamic integration is poles apart from the British experience, where appeasing the most devout elements of the Muslim minority has seen Sharia-compliant law effectively enshrined in the British legal system. In March this year, the Law Society distributed a set of guidelines to apply Islamic principles that will enable lawyers to draft wills that discriminate against children who are adopted or born out of wedlock. Women and “unbelievers” will also be denied an equal share of inheritance.
“The male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir of the same class,” the guidance says. “Non-Muslims may not inherit at all, and only Muslim marriages are recognised.” Multiple marriages can also be recognised in Sharia-approved wills that will be valid under British law.
It seems incredible that a civilised country would tolerate such backward and discriminatory practises. There are already dozens of informal Sharia “tribunals” in the UK that deal with disputes between Muslims, including child custody matters. A handful of these tribunals are official under the Arbitration Act with the power to adjudicate on a range of issues from commercial disputes to family matters.
One can understand why some people hold genuine fears that the Muslim population is creating a “parallel legal system” that is incompatible with British values.
It’s a mistake to presume that all Islamic people want us to change our ways or laws to better fit the values of their homeland.
When you acquiesce to the loudest, most radical voices, you risk alienating others in the community who are only marginalised further. And you risk giving ammunition to the bigots who want to paint all Muslim migrants as incapable of assimilating with the wider population.
Being a proudly multicultural society doesn’t mean Australians need to compromise our cherished values of equality, freedom and democracy. We can celebrate diversity without condoning backward notions that subjugate women. The Bendigo mosque kerfuffle is an excellent example of what can happen when a sizeable portion of the community believe that all Muslims are potential extremists with no respect for Australian values and way of life. By giving in to the demands of those who don’t share our standards and principles, we only serve a tiny minority of the minority.
The overwhelming majority of Muslim women in Australia don’t wear full-face veils, which was also the case in France even before the burqa ban was introduced. Burqas, niqabs and other Muslim garments that cover a woman’s face have no place in Australian society and we should not be afraid to ban them. They are subjugating, oppressive and interfere with basic communication. There is a marked difference between these items and the hijab or chador which only cover the hair but leave the face fully exposed.
We should feel comfortable to readily call out elements within any culture or religion that are incompatible with modern Australian life. Too many tiptoe around issues involving cultural or religious sensitivities, frightened that they’ll be labelled intolerant. We’ve seen in this country the growing problem of forced and child marriages and female genital mutilation barely mentioned in Parliament, the media or by feminists, who would rather obsess about trivialities than address issues affecting some of the most disempowered and at-risk women in our community.
Australia is one of the most inclusive and socially cohesive countries it the world. We cannot risk what makes us such a uniquely desirable country to live in by bending over backwards to suit cultures that are at odds with our core belief system.