It's a strange world we live in when a nation can refuse women the right to wear a head covering but a cartoonist can't protest a decision she believes muzzled free speech.
Last week two significant events happened that revolve around women and the Islamic faith.
On Tuesday, France's lower house of Parliament voted to ban the burqa and the niqab in a near-unanimous decision -- 336-1. If it passes the Senate where a vote is scheduled for September, it will impose a $185 fine and/or a citizenship course for first-time violators and even stiffer penalties to those persons who force women to veil themselves in public -- fines of up to $38,000 and a year in prison.
Also on Tuesday a Seattle woman whose cartoon drawing of common household items caused an al-Queda linked radical cleric to call for her assassination was told by the FBI to take the death threat seriously. The flap occurred when cartoonist Molly Norris, protesting Comedy Central's decision to censor an episode of the often-controversial South Park series which depicted the prophet Muhammed wearing a bear suit, created an "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" cartoon. In it, Norris portrayed sweet-faced cartoon characters modeled on:
a teacup
a spool of thread
a domino
a box of pasta
a cherry
a puppy-face purse
each insisting that it was the real likeness of the prophet.
Although Norris intended the cartoon as satire, the depiction of any prophet is prohibited in Islam and is deeply offensive to Muslims. According to CNN, her cartoon has led to a call for her murder despite the cartoonist's own professed ignorance:
"She should be taken as a prime target of assassination," terror suspect Anwar al-Awlaki purportedly wrote about cartoonist Molly Norris in an English-language magazine called Inspire that claimed to be a publication of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
"This campaign is not a practice of freedom of speech, but is a nationwide mass movement of Americans" who are "going out of their way to offend Muslims worldwide," the article signed by al-Awlaki continued....
Norris' cartoon inspired a campaign to create pictures of the Islamic prophet across the internet....
Norris said the consequences of the drawing were unintended. "I wasn't savvy," the cartoonist said in an interview last month with City Arts Magazine, where many of her cartoons were published. "I didn't mean for my satirical poster to be taken seriously. It became kind of an excuse for people to hate or be mean-spirited. I'm not-mean spirited," Norris said.
So which is the greater crime? One woman's misunderstanding of the overarching significance of a particular religious belief or a nation denying the rights of a small group of women to wear body coverings in observance of their faith? Where do they fall on the spectrum of religious tolerance and acceptance?
As Madeleine Bunting writes in The Guardian:
The veil debate is making it entirely legitimate to pillory, mock and ridicule a tiny number of women on the basis of what they wear. French politicians described the full veil as a "walking coffin"....In France it is estimated there are only 2,000 women who cover their faces with the burqa or the niqab out of a Muslim population of five million. The response is out of all proportion....
French politicians insisted on Tuesday that women need to be liberated from the full veil. Forcing people to be free has a long and undistinguished history - well described by many, including George Orwell - yet too many times an age is blinded by its own prejudices and forgets that liberation can never be imposed.
Bunting says the issue is blown out of proportion. Can the same be said for the Norris cartoon? Or are the two situations completely separate? Where do you stand?
Comments
when this westerners are become of enemy of the Muslims woman’s hijab and hate this much then how come they appreciate the nuns who wear full veil, then how come they don’t hate that dress and demand not to wear in the churches also? this is all hate which Jews and Christians are having for Muslims. this is all double standard of the western countries and they are racing each other which country will hurt, tortures Muslim nation most? what a world we are living?
I really do not support the ban in France but it amazes me how the Muslim community has unitedly raised its voice against this while it stays largely silent where women are being ACTUALLY mistreated. I mean…where was this global brotherhood when women were being forced to wear the burqa and chador in Iran. Or when virgin prisoners, again in Iran, were being raped in jails to ensure their going to hell. Or when women were being stoned to death for an array of reasons under the Taliban. Or when children were being married off to adults in Yemen.
Also, the hijab is compulsory in Islam, NOT the burqa. So I don’t see it as a major interference with religious principles but yes, it is a infringement upon freedom of dressing.
Your article seems like a case of apples and oranges. Or rather, veils and fatwas.
Plus, it seems you are arbitrarily linking the veil ban (which I had thought was only to ban the full hajib, not just the face veil)–with Molly Norris’ cartoon.
you might want to check-out Molly Norris’ cartoon supporting the veil (and outlawing “couture”). Her cartoon shows only a face scarf veil.
Besides the fact that both things “represent” women and Islam, the meanings are very different. Molly Norris was saying something about freedom of expression, which led to a fatwa against her by a cleric, because it was interpreted as blasphemy.
Really, it can only be blasphemy if that person has an intention of offending people (Muslims in this case), whereas, Molly was merely naive–as I also was until this controversy began. However, naivete counts for nothing when it comes to issuing fatwas. She was unfortunately caught in a hot ideological debate that she never understood, until now.
On the other hand, the “veil ban” in France seems to argue for the opposite point: to disavow a whole religious tradition by a government that doesn’t separate church from state, apparently.
But, a law to ban the veil doesn’t result in any fatwas as far as I can see. It seems a more ideological fight suited for Islamic activists than a silly cartoon that an American woman made, then apologized for.
So, cartoon of prophet equals fatwa; whereas,
law banning veil equals ??
The interesting aspect of drawing a picture of the Prophet is that NO one knows just what he looks like! I say every cartoonist, sketch artist and the like worldwide should draw their own version of what they believe the Prophet looks like.
Banning a picture of someone who has no idenity gives me an indepth look and the mentality of this so called cleric and his ilk.
Since we have banned Christian symboles being displayed or worn in the goverment of Canada employ, then why are hijab and turbins allowed?