In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal there’s an article called “U.K.’s Criticism of Practices of Muslims Raises Tensions” (Oct 19, 2006, A6). The authors of the article cite a case last week in which “a U.K. school suspended a teacher for refusing to remove a veil that left only her eyes uncovered. Mr. Blair this week came out in support of the suspension.”
With all the violence and abuse in this world and specifically in our schools, I find it so strange that a teacher would be suspended from her job simply because of her choice of dress and her public statement of who she is as a Muslim woman. I know that wearing the veil has been seen by some (not this nun) as, in the words of UK Speaker of the House, “a visible statement of separation and difference.” I don’t know all the circumstances that led up to this suspension. I’m also not a school teacher or administrator so I don’t know all the things that they must deal with in situations like this. However, on the face of it, it doesn’t look good. How many schools or other organizations could have brought the same argument against women religious? After all, many of us did and still do wear habits that could easily fall under the category of ”a visible statement of separation and difference.”
The issue of a teacher being suspended because of the way she chose to respectfully make public her beliefs gives me pause. It makes me examine my own beliefs and practices and how it is that I treat other people who are seemingly different from me. Am I able to respect and appreciate people for who they are? Am I willing to stand up for people who are deemed “separate and different”? Can I place my own fears aside and step up to the plate in a spirit of gentleness, compassion, and justice? These are big questions but ones that are worth wrestling with.
Email This Post
Print This Post
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
You’ve selected an appropriate story and metaphor to illustrate a cultural habit at the root of small and vast evil. An excellent posting.
I think she was being singled out as a way of controling public sentiment and keeping the thought of terrorism in everyone’s mind. She wears a niqab:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niqab
Which conceals everything but her eyes. I think that it is her religious right to cover herself if she wishes, but in a culture which views accountability as being “visibility” both literal and figurative, she did become an excellent figurehead for the “war on terror and oppression”.
Some would probably think she is oppressed, but amazingly, most Muslim women wear the veil because they like it; they feel it saves them from being used by men for their appearance.
I do not agree with those women who refuse to remove their niqab for their ID cards and such, but in every day life, I think it makes for a good teachable object and a way of broadening student’s horizons and teaching them about tolerance and understanding.
Excellent observations, Brittany. I particularly liked your comment about being “in a culture which views accountability as being ‘visibility’ both literal and figurative.”
I think about this in connection with other issues like gun violence at schools. How many kids are singled out for being “different” because they have piercings or blue hair or trench coats? Again, a visibility issue.
I also think of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policies and again there’s that visibility thing. Such policies purport to be ‘tolerant’ of people’s sexual orientation as long as it is not made public/visible.
I will have to think more on this visibility thing because I think it also has to do with Holly’s comment about this issue being “a cultural habit at the root of small and vast evil.”
More comments on this issue? Please write.
Hm…on the one hand I know how it is with religious belief: so long as it doesn’t conflict, coincide, or otherwise put out someone else, it’s fine. For instance a composer’s concert one year was scheduled for the feast of the Immaculate Conception, one never commuted in my diocese. I didn’t show up, and while it didn’t impact my grade, it was known that it wasn’t a Good Thing To Do to miss that concert. (Legally they would’ve been in hot water, since accomodation must be given for religious observances.) For the record, my chair understood, but he wasn’t in charge of the concert. (I didn’t have a piece at it.)
On the other, I’ve witnessed and been the target of some pretty nasty barbs because of religion in a so-called “tolerant” society, and I know I’ve been guilty of the same to other denominations, mostly ones who try to convert me while I’m eating lunch. Like you, the article raises a bunch of big questions I don’t have answers for.
It seems to me as though most of society in engaged in this elaborate dance around acting in an explicitly discriminating way, until we glance the other way…
I agree with the orientation issue. I have a number of homosexual friends and it is amazing that people act towards them with this, “I’ll tolerate your presence as long as you do not explicitly confess your sexuality”. Take about red tape in human relationships!
Oh, and by the way, he wears a tench coat!
As I understood it, the teachers veil, covered her mouth. The children had difficulty understanding her, her speesh being muffled.
Certainly understandable to ask her either to get another position or remove the ‘mouth covering.
Thanks for the comment, Barbara. Not having the children understand what she’s teaching would definitely be a problem. In a position like teaching, care for the children and their learning process must be a priority.
I have to say that I agree totally with the decision of the school. This woman did not wear her niqab to the interview which got her the job – and she was told that there was no problem with her veiling outside the classroom – ie in the corridors or staffroom. I question why a religion would require a person to cover their face before children. Would it be acceptable for the teacher if the whole class dressed as she did?
Maybe it’s just me and my paranoia right now because of the violence in schools and stuff, but it would be very easy for someone to pose as this teacher and then cause trouble in the school… with identifiable faces, this is far less likely.
There are so many levels and nuances to this story than one simple WSJ article can contain. Any situation that deals with religious freedom (whether in truth or sensationally) is a lightning bolt issue. And when it gets filtered through the media (which strives to provide the sound bites that we ourselves demand of our media now), the facts can sometimes get so distilled that only the charge of the lightning bolt remains, out of context, and open to interpretation.
Greetings from the UK. This story has been very poorly reported around the world as well as in the UK. The lady concerned was not a teacher, she was a teaching assistant responsible for ethnic minorities. It is also interesting to note that she did not wear her veil when attending interview for the post.
Hello, Inspector Sands … thanks for the additional information. It’s like assembling a jigsaw puzzle. It’s tough to know if you are getting the full story when you read/see/listen to the news. Where does one go for the full scoop and nothing but the scoop? How does one trust a news source?
Ok, I’m a little late to this one. I just found this blog a few days ago. I’m not even sure if people still read/respond to the older stuff. But
I suppose I’ll find out.
As with everyone else here, I don’t know all the details of the story. It is interesting that the woman didn’t wear her veil on the initial interview though. I definitely believe people have the right to witness to their faith. But why couldn’t she just wear a veil that covered her hair with her face showing? Or she could have worn a Muslim symbol on a necklace as we Catholics do with crucifixes/medals, etc. That would be just as much of a witness as a veil with just the eyes showing.
I do feel that there are genuine concerns with terrorism around the world. It’s not just a perception. As one poster stated, if a woman wears a veil with just the eyes showing, anyone could impersonate her and sneak into the classroom unnoticed. This could put the children’s lives at risk, whether they be British children or kids of any ethnic minority.
donna