France’s ban on a religious symbol pertaining to Muslim women is an example of extended ignorance rather than of progressive enlightenment. Under the guise of eliminating hints of religion for the sake of an unbiased whole, France’s anti-veil laws systematically discriminate against women wishing to abide by their own religions. Women wearing head scarves are barred from entering certain events, viewed with disdain by the people around them and sometimes physically attacked for the clothes they wear, especially if they are women of color.
The two laws that target Muslims unambiguously ban veils in elementary and secondary schools and ban full face veils. And politicians are pushing for more. Observant Muslim women in France are frequently denied entrance to places. In a recent example from The New York Times, Malek Layouni and her 9-year-old child were barred from entering a recreational site because Layouni wore a head scarf. Some hope such laws may be extended to prevent “religious symbols” in the workplace, thereby further preventing the growth of the Muslim community in France. Progress is certainly being made in this regard, as many Frenchwomen who desire to remain fully veiled refuse to leave their homes.
The continuation of these laws is fascist and grossly discriminating in nature, and with them we observe the government-enforced externalization of victim-blaming. The implementation of these laws punishes Muslim tradition and expresses that if these women continue to dress as an extension of their religion, it is their fault if they are harmed because of it. It seems dystopian and surreal that people could be harshly castigated for the clothes they wear, yet in modern France, it is state-sanctioned and accepted by many.
In addition to this national racism, the laws reinforce the ugly habit of reducing women to what they wear. We stigmatize women for wearing too little, or too much, and the laws banning veils and head scarves take this stigmatization to frightening levels. Muslim Frenchwomen are reprimanded verbally, physically and legally. France has issued a warning: “Get out of our country, or we will force you out.”
It is especially jarring to hear of such religious discrimination coming from a country that strongly privileges those who belong to the Christian faith. France seems to be encouraging the dismemberment of some religions, not all of them. The country still celebrates Christian holidays, after all. It’s unsubtle racism disguised as purported tolerance.
In fact, France’s outward encouragement of antireligious attitudes does little to promote overall tolerance and a lot to foster racist sentiment, specifically regarding those belonging to the Muslim community. Even while right-wing officials claim the laws are intended to level the playing field and to further separation of church and state, the laws instead openly discourage religious practice and endorse anti-Muslim sentiment.
Just as religious extremism is not the correct way to assuage the “sins” of the world, antireligion is not the correct way to amend religious extremism. What both religious extremism and antireligion seem to lack is a sense of empathy. Both parties are too busy scratching at each other’s throats to comprehend the internalized messages they in actuality betray. Besides the reality that a goal of merely tolerance is a low, low bar to set, neither side is willing to simply listen to another argument, let alone—gasp!—reconsider their own opinions.
Here we see government-approved backlash against an entire community due to repellent generalizations made by the (white) majority. The Muslim population of the world is already intensely marginalized; based on history, it makes sense that this nonsensical hatred would find some means of formal authorization.
