I have always been a great fan of France, an ardent Francophile, I love the country, the culture and the people. But I am beginning to think that the French have gone completely bonkers and, try as I might, I cannot find a rational argument to defend the latest contentious bill passing through their parliament.


While its supporters defend the French law that bans the wearing of hijab, and all other religious clothing, in state schools as consistent with France's secular constitution, its critics see it as racist and discriminatory. It is a law that was quite simply guaranteed to provoke outrage from the moment it was thought up ... so what on earth were the French thinking of?

A lot of the issue is all about timing. What is being heralded as a law to ban hijab, and therefore is perceived as a law that discriminates against Muslims, is in fact far broader and will affect people from all religious denominations. Christian crosses, Jewish skull caps and Sikh turbans are also forbidden, and those to whom the wearing of such items is important will doubtless also feel that the ruling is inappropriate. The fact that the most vocal opposition comes from Muslim groups is indicative of the times in which we live. Half a century ago the Jews felt (with considerable justification at the time), that they were a persecuted minority, a few decades later Sikhs were among the many Asian immigrant groups in Europe to feel the brunt of racist prejudice and were the driving force behind the protest against laws that enforced the wearing of motorbike crash helmets because it meant that they would have to remove their turbans.

Today, in the post 9/11 world, Muslims the world over feel that they are unfairly discriminated against, and so it is not surprising that they are driving the strongest protests against the new law in France.

What baffles me about all this is the 'why'. Why does France feel the need to pass such a law? Why does the French government think it is relevant in today's world? Let me explain: take the Muslim issue out of the equation for a moment and think about the wider practical implications of the law.

France may be secular, but it is a strongly Catholic country and some state schools are still run by Nuns - does this mean that they will have to remove their habits as well as their crosses and whimples? Should a priest visit a school, will he have to remove his robes? Likewise will a Protestant minister have to remove his dog collar? See my point, even at the most basic level the law is ludicrously impractical.

Practicality apart, any law that dictates what can and cannot be worn is, by definition, one that affects people on a very personal and spiritual level. We are what we wear; whether religious or not, human beings identify their character and beliefs through what they choose to wear. Clothes are representative of class, cultural tradition and character as well as religion and there are few countries in the world that govern dress code by law.

Both Saudi Arabia and Iran are widely criticised by Western secular governments for enforcing the compulsory wearing of the abbaya and hijab by law, yet France, a major Western secular power, is now doing exactly the same thing. It really doesn't matter whether a law demands or prohibits the wearing of an item - it is the fact that such enforcement restricts personal freedom that makes it unpopular.

One of the most refreshingly encouraging aspects of European culture in recent years has been the fact that educated, enlightened people really don't care what their fellow countrymen and women wear - familiarity has finally bred tolerance and abbayas, salwar kameez, saris, monastic robes, Hasidic Jewish black or Buddhist orange raise no eyebrows. We have learned that clothes are not a threat, that being different is not intended to make others fearful or to imply criticism, in other words we have begun to learn tolerance.

And yet there is nothing, absolutely nothing, tolerant about this law. It is as restrictive as it is ludicrous, and it is hopelessly out of time and pace with modern day thinking. France, like many countries nowadays is a multi-cultural society. Dubai is, without a doubt, one of the best examples of such that I have ever experienced; imagine if all non-Muslim residents were suddenly told to wear hijab in the UAE - there would be an outcry. The fact that our children sit side by side in our classrooms with kids from a wealth of different countries and cultures makes them culturally and intellectually wiser and more enlightened. Until recently, a Christian French child probably thought nothing of their Muslim friend wearing Hijab or their Jewish pal wearing a skull cap - but now they will.

Advocates of the French law stress that it has a narrow remit (with the implication being that it will therefore have minimal impact), because it only applies to schools. But the reality is that those upon whom it does impact are of impressionable age. We are taught that schools represent right rather than wrong, and so a law that affects school children educates a generation. When such a law is one that defines and highlights difference it is a dangerous one indeed. Those who dreamt up the French law may have done so believing that they would prevent prejudice, but the reality is that they are likely to be doing exactly the opposite.

As I said, I think some in France have gone completely bonkers.

Viewpoints:

Read Also: Islamic Clothing and it's Significance - Why not men?