|
||||||||||
|
The answer to hijab use: common
sense Conor Lenihan, the Minister for Integration, wants the opinion of school
principals on the question of the Islamic "hijab", or headscarf, and
has written to 4,000 primary and secondary schools seeking their views. Is this a valuable consultation, or a costly public relations exercise
which makes the minister look so awfully, awfully democratic? "Democracy" is about the citizen exercising his or her vote at
the polls; and about the elected administration being accountable to the
electorate, and to the Constitution. It is not about doing opinion polls, for
which there are perfectly reputable agencies in the private sector. Surely the broad answer to the hijab question lies in the application of
common sense, and also a sense of proportion. And factor into the equation the
customs of the country. In sartorial matters, what is the custom of the country in Ireland? Basically, there is none. Unlike the practice in the United Kingdom,
Ireland has seldom imposed rules and regulations about what an individual may
wear (in England, rules about what you may wear to Royal Ascot are now quite
stringent; and London clubland still refuses admission to gentlemen who do not
wear jackets and neckties). In clothes, the Irish are an informal people and don't care too much for
rules about dress. De Valera, being reluctant to wear a top hat (which
represented a discarded upper class), would wear his university robes on formal
occasions. The custom in Ireland is that people wear what they like, and it is left to
their own judgment not to break the bounds of decency. Churches in Ireland -- unlike in parts of Continental Europe -- do not put
up signs saying: "Please Do Not Wear Beach Clothes in Church". Most
Irish people know, from common sense (and the weather!) that you don't fetch up
at a church service in beachwear. In terms of religious signs and symbols, again, the Irish tradition is that
it be left to the individual and the community. It is not like France, where Republican tradition is rigidly secularist.
Schools have been burned down -- certainly in Catholic Brittany -- for
displaying a crucifix on the wall. Every now and then, a row breaks out in a region like the Vendee in western
France -- still both Catholic and Royalist in tradition -- because a religious
picture has appeared in a classroom. The French secularist state imposes its
hegemony, in this respect, quite firmly. That is why the "hijab" question was so inflammatory in France --
because of the fierceness of the French secular state. In Italy, the situation is more flexibly interpreted. Italy is also a
republic in which church and state are separated, but there is more tolerance
for "the custom of the country". If a holy picture of the local saint
appears in a post office in Naples, they don't make a federal case out of it. Each nation-state must decide on these rules and regulations according to
its own culture and tradition. Church and State are separated in the Republic
of Ireland, but there has always been a crossover in "values", which
reasonably accurately reflect the democratic will. Overall, I would wager, the majority of Irish people would have a
"live and let live" attitude to something like the wearing of the
hijab -- or even the more forbidding burqa. If Muslims want to wear it, that's
their call. However, there is also another tradition which must be considered: the
tradition of schools, institutions and places of employment being free to set
their own boundaries of discipline. If a school has a school uniform, then the principal must be able to
enforce the disciplinary code of the uniform. If a place of employment has a
dress code, the boss must be able to insist on compliance. A hairdressing
salon, for example, may have a standard garment for all employees. So may a
hospital. If a business prefers male staff to wear a tie -- to project a
specific brand image -- then the boss is entitled to specify that. The answer, clearly, in the matter of schools, is that each school must
decide for itself what the dress code should be. And the principal's word is
law: that is the meaning of leadership. That should also be the case for places
of work, the law being interpreted according to a sense of proportion and
common sense. There was a scandalous -- and ridiculous -- case in Britain earlier this
year in which a young Muslim woman sued a private hairdressing salon which
stated that candidates for employment should have trendy or "funky"
hairstyles visible to the clients. The Muslim woman did not quite win the right
to cover her head as a hairstylist. But she did win several thousand pounds for
"hurt feelings", which the putative employer had to cough up. When I was at my convent boarding school many moons ago, the Mother
Superior used to warn of those pupils who "if you give them an inch,
they'll take a mile". There always are those individuals who, given a
centimetre, will go to extremes, and make demands beyond the sphere of reason.
The law should not indulge such plaintiffs. Does Mr Lenihan really have to spend public money to come up with the
answers which are, quite honestly, self-evident to anyone of common sense? I think not. - http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/the-answer-to-hijab-use-common-sense-1428691.html |
Please report any
broken links to
Webmaster
Copyright © 1988-2012 irfi.org. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer