|
The statement of Nicholas Sarcozy that Burqa is not welcome in
France, that it is a symbol of oppression and not of religion has
raised serious debate all over. It is France again where five years
ago the display of religious markers, head scarf, Sikh turban, and
Jewish skull cap in schools was banned. Public servants cannot use
the same in place of work.
France as a secular state has adopted a particular version of this
policy. France has been setting example for some of the countries in
this imposing type of secularism, like Turkey. It has another
dimension and that is large number of poor Muslims coming here are
from its old colonies who live in very abysmal conditions. One
recalls a large section of these immigrant Muslim population lives
in suburbs, poor localities in economic deprivation. A couple of
years ago right here some Muslim youth began a series of violent
acts out of frustration due to unemployment and poverty. The
cultural economic differences between these sections are very wide
and urban affluent ones’ are very gross.
How is secularism to be implemented? One way is that social
situations are transformed and the hold of feudal elements is done
away with and state encourages the society to adopt the norms of
social and gender equality. And with this, the symbols of gender
inequalities start receding in the face of changing social
situation. There is no uniform pattern in this. Even after the
democratic regimes come to being formally, many an old norms take
time to vanish. Surely there are some of these which have to be done
away by strong legislation. In India during freedom movement
forcible prevention of Sati, burning of wife after husbands’ death,
had to be resorted through legislation.
Burqa has not been the mandatory part of Koranic teachings. Here the
emphasis is on dressing modestly. In earlier societies and other
societies also, different dress codes have imposed on and also
adopted by women, some as honor and more of them to impose controls
on them. Dr. Zeenat Shaukat Ali, a noted Islamic scholar points out
that long before the advent of Islam, veiling and seclusion appear
to have existed in Hellinitic-Byzantine
era, and also amongst Sassanians of Persia. In ancient Mesopotamia
veil of women was regarded as sign of respectability and status.
During feudal times, the patriarchal norms were operated in the
society through the institution of religion. With persistence of
patriarchy the women were made to wear the identity markers in
different cultures and societies. Stronger the patriarchal norms,
stronger the social presence of clergy, stronger is the imposition
of identity markers. These may be Ghunghat, (India) head scarf in
different cultures and burqa amongst Muslims. From the beginning of
twentieth century, the status of women started improving slightly
and women started coming to social space. By 1980s in many a Muslim
majority countries also women came to their own and prevalence of
burqa came down, and at places totally done away with. The situation
started worsening with the Global War on terror at world level and
with communal violence in India intensifying.
With so called ‘war on terror’ the intimidation of Muslim
communities’ world over started worsening. With this orthodox and
conservative sects in Islam came to fore. Fundamentalist tendencies
like Taliban propped up at places and worsened the situation by
giving sense-less fatwa’s and dictates. Taliban imposed the norms in
most inhuman way. The sense of insecurity in the wake of war,
invasion of Afghanistan and then Iraq increased the sense of
insecurity and the consequent hold of conservative sections, who
generally impose such restrictive norms on women increased. Still in
many a countries, where the women enjoyed a safe and secure social
condition, the use of burqa came down. If we have a look at global
scene we will find great amount of diversity in this matter. Broadly
one can say, more the insecurity, more the hold of orthodoxy more
the burqa.
In India one can see a great diversity in the use of the same. In
Kerala it was not much in use and in Kashmir it was practically
absent. In Kerala its use started going up with the rising communal
violence of the decade of 1980s and with the rising influence of
Wahabi Islam through those taking up jobs in Gulf region. In Kashmir
the rise of militancy after 1990, the communalization of the Kashmir
issue, led to rise of conservative sections who wanted to impose the
veil, but Kashmiri women held there ground and resisted the same.
Also lot of misconceptions have been constructed around Islam, Burqa
and local traditions. Recently India’s President, Mrs. Pratibha
Patil stated that the Ghunghat in Rajasthan has been introduced due
to the fear of Muslim kings, to protect women from their atrocities.
One can ask those arguing on these lines, how did Sati come into
being? Can hiding the face protect women or make them more
vulnerable to atrocities? Sati, Ghunghat etc, have been more a mark
of patriarchal values than due to the impact of Muslim Kings. Even
today Ghunghat persists not because of the fear of Muslims but the
strong hold of patriarchal values. The occasional cases of Sati also
fall in that category. Bal Thackeray of Shiv Sena came for a strong
praise of Sarcozy for his stand on Burqa. The same Shiv Sena has
been intimidating girls on Valentine day off and on and giving the
fatwa that girls should not wear Jeans. What a case of crass double
standards!
The social and political situation leads to the social psychology
and individual psychology of women is shaped around that. Men have
held the sway in dictating such norms, and social situation is
created where women internalize these norms. The Sufi tradition of
Islam was not for the use of burqa. There are two essential points
which the rulers have to keep in mind. One is that the very basis of
democracy is freedom and liberal space. The countries like Saudi
Arabia impose burqa. The countries like France want to do away with
the same through a dictat. What is the difference? Secondly the
point today is to see that globally and within the nation states the
minorities are given the feeling of security, they are provided with
situations leading to equity. These will ensure that the identity
issues will take the back seat. Today the communities where security
is the issue, equity is eluding the community, identity becomes the
major rallying point. Just the statement about identity markers,
without changing the social situation leading to such phenomenon is
a hollow move.
|
'I see my role as offering the voices of the silenced majority of
Muslims in America and around the world',
Zafar Shaikh-
The
Men Inspired by Debacles:
Skilled Hands converting couplets 
All Hardship for 
Hijab no barrier for Sara to run the school she founded twenty years
ago
Comment on this article