In , the French government instituted a ban on the wearing of "conspicuous signs" of religious affiliation in public schools. Though the ban appli. Harry Kreisler welcomes historian Joan Wallach Scott who traces her intellectual odyssey and recalls the impact of the women's movement on her research and. The Politics of the Veil is an explosive refutation of this view, one that bears important implications for us all. Joan Wallach Scott, the renowned.
|Published:||4 August 2017|
|PDF File Size:||25.45 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.83 Mb|
While making her own position crystal clear, Scott gives full report of the range of views in France on the headscarf ban, of supporters and opponents, especially among the non-Muslims.
A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a recipient of the Toynbee Prize in social science, she is Henry Charles Lea Professor Emerita of History at Princeton University and professor emerita of history, politics of the veil, medieval studies, and comparative literature at the University of Toronto.
Photocopies that are provided to the end user for a fee may not be made without payment of permission fees to Duke University Press.
So Scott tackles the particulars of French universalism that allow for this situation to pass. The problem is they made implicitly Catholic, or ex-Catholic white French men the model of the universal and expect everyone to politics of the veil to that.
Scott maintains that the law, far from reconciling religious and ethnic differences, only exacerbates them. In addition, several of the girls who were involved in setting off the debates had voluntarily adopted the headscarf.
- To quote this article :
These young women had not been pressured into hijab by their fathers, brothers, imams, or local community, but instead had selected to wear the headscarf as an individual choice. Politics of the veil use of religious garb as a form of pious expression was both fully autonomous and entirely personal.
Should Muslims be considered as a disadvantaged group and benefit from policies of affirmation action? How should the claims of sexual difference be fairly regulated?
Which patriarchal practices, if any, should be combated? In the end, the counter-discourse of toleration and recognition may turn out to be as problematic as the republican discourse of abstraction, denial politics of the veil repression which Scott so eloquently criticises.