Vanilla Forums has been nominated for a second time in the CMS Critic "Critic's Choice" awards, and we need your vote! Read more here, and then do the thing (please).
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
There's also a link in that article to an explanatory slideshow that defines a few terms like hijab, niqab, burqa, etc.
The short version is that France has decided that the wearing of the veil is "contrary to the values of the republic", and a "symbol of radical religious practice", and is now considering barring anyone wearing a veil from accessing public services such as healthcare, social security, education, public transport, etc.
Now, France is perhaps a slightly unusual case in that it is generally pretty anti-religious, which is probably why this particular issue is coming to a head there first. It isn't the only such example, though, there is the Swiss ban on the contruction of Minarets, and other countries in Europe have contemplated taking similar steps banning face coverings.
My thinking is basically that, firstly, describing the wearing of a veil as "radical religious practice" is setting a pretty freaking low bar. Where does circumcision fit on this continuum? Or the feeding of wine to children and telling them it's blood? Or refusing to cut one's hair and instead binding it around one's head with a strip of cloth?
Second, though I can see the argument that the veil in its various forms is a symbol of oppression, I'm not convinced that any women that wears a veil is de facto being oppressed.
Lastly, even if it is granted that the wearing of veils is a cultural institution that perpetuates the oppression of women (which is a stance I'd probably agree with, for the record), it seems to me that the very worst manner in which to deal with this is by creating an environment where such women are literally turned into second class citizens, and thus rendered absolutely reliant on the support of a (probably male) benefactor.