The Hijab, Racism, & Education

by Kim Fri Aug 22, 2008 19:29

Dear Fred- All at once you were curious why no one had anything to say about the article and when I express an interest in reading what it said- you reply with something about being amazed that some one might ask where it could be read- seeing as (and you may have noticed) its not sunday anymore.

As for knowing that its a hateful paper. Eoghan Harris, Brendan O Connor, Shane Ross to name but a few. (With the exception of Gene Kerrigan) there isn't a 'journalist' to be found in the paper. I have read copies belonging to others but I refuse to give a penny to that slug O'Reilly- you may not be amazed at my reasons for that (I hope)

So if anyone could direct me to a place I could read it- cause if its bad I will send in a letter to the NUJ.

by Fred Johnston Fri Aug 22, 2008 16:13

Dear Kim - This sort of thing always amazes me; if you are seriously interested in what was said you won't have it on your own terms. Go and seek a copy of last Sunday's 'Life' supplement in the Sunday Independent and read the stuff for yourself: how do you know it's a hateful paper if you won't buy it? I do not know whether it is on the net. I have written to the NUJ about it. I would suggest others do the same. It is unlikely, without some prodding, that the Sunday Indo will even acknowledge the least insult to anyone.

by Kim Thu Aug 21, 2008 13:20

Where can you read the piece- is it on the net? I won't buy the indo or sunday indo- hateful paper. Can you point to where I can see what they wrote? If its anything like myers recent pieces people should make complaints. Thanks

by Fred Johnston Wed Aug 20, 2008 18:05

I am curious that no one seems to be ready to comment on the Sunday Independent item of last weekend in their Life supplement, which blatantly mocked Arabs and made fun of Palestinian women in particular. Am I the only one to have read it? I have written to the FOC of the NUJ Chapel at the Sunday Independent to protest about the nature of the article.

by malcontent - swp Mon Aug 18, 2008 20:32

we are still suffering state religious oppression in this country. the fact that every day children have to enter schools and be exposed to depictions of a corpse on a cross with blood dripping out of his feet is of more concern to me than what kids wear on their head-we on the left should be entering schools and removing these obscene images to protect the kids from mind abuse-it is cowardly and shameful that we do nothing!
my parents are atheists but still at school I was forced along with the rest of the class to endure 3 class periods in a row sat on stools with no backs waiting for (vocations) god to talk to us in our heads to ask us to become nuns-no not in the 1950s in the 1990s!

by pat c Mon Jul 28, 2008 13:43

i think it would be wrong for the state to ban hijabs in schools but socialists should point that the hijab is used as an instrument toi oppress women. the fact that many muslim women support the wearing of the veil doesnt change that. many catholic women oppose gayrights,contraception, etc that doesnt mean they are right.

yes there are other people in schools who wear veils (not so many anymore): nuns. but again socialists should argue for the complete separation of church & state. that means opposing catholic control of education. but it also means opposing islamic control of education.

having fought for so long against the catholic mullahs we shouldnt now bow down before the muslim mullahs.

There is nothing racist about fighting catholic misogyny and equally there is nothing racist about fighting muslim misogyny.

religion is not race.

NO gods

NO masters

by Bemused Sun Jul 27, 2008 22:15

Am I missing the poing here..what is the controversy? Isn't there still women in teaching positions with veils on their heads...Well there certainly was up to ten years ago. Was there a BOM intervention before they chose not to wear veils?
Why can't we afford the same tolerance to students...This wouldn't be a case of RACISM would it?

by Seamus Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:30

Like Margaret, I have overseas teaching experience. I taught in a feepaying secondary school where three-quarters of the pupils, girls & boys, were muslims, mostly of Asian origin. About 22 per cent of the rest were christians of African origin, and there was a sprinkling of buddhists, sikhs and hindus. The Board members were all muslim business people. Their pragmatic policy was to recognize hindu holidays like Diwali for which the whole school got a day off. Christian holidays occurred during school breaks anyway. Muslim girls were encouraged to play hockey and if their parents were strict the girls could wear ankle-length leggings underneath sports shorts. A request was made for a few muslim girls to wear headscarves to school but the muslim BOM turned it down, saying they should wear the ordinary school uniform. However, these girls arrived at the school gate wearing scarves, which they didn't wear in class. Many muslim pupils were driven from school at 3 pm straight down to the local madrassa attached to the mosque where they did two hours of muslim studies before going home for evening meals.

I think each Irish school BOM should decide the issue of headscarves in consultation with the PTA. A rule could be made allowing muslim girls to wear headscarves, with parental consent, to and from school and possibly during breaks in the playground, but with the proviso that they remove scarves during lessons and when playing games.

Margaret's observations about school provisions for her children's non-participation in RE lessons indicate that if schools have libraries and free classrooms the attendance of children of agnostic parents at Catholic (and C of I) schools need not present problems. In Ireland, being educated with one's "peers" doesn't need to mean going to a nondenominational school.

by Margaret Sat Jul 26, 2008 22:26

My children go to a catholic state school - they are not catholic - both my partner and myself have no religion - but we have no choice. we want our children to attend the local state school where they will mix with their peers. We do not have the money for private schools and if we had we would not want our children to only mix with the children of the relatively well to do.

We discussed with the school the religious issues before they went and we have to say the school has kept commitments. Our children do not have to do religious classes and they go to the library if there is room and available supervision. we were worried that they might have a problem when it was seen they were 'not Catholic'. In fact they are envied because they get extra free periods. It is difficult being a child and you can be picked upon. It is important that a child doesn't stand out as being 'different.' Wearing the hajib could cause a child to be picked on.

I have to agree with Ruari Quinn (and I wouldn't normally) that if you chose to come to a country you adhere to its norms but do what you wish in your own home. I have worked in Arab countries and I adhered to their norms as far as practical. I didn't have to be there. I was earning good money and I felt it was right that I respected their norms, even if I diddn't like them.

My worry is that if you ban the hijab, moslem girls will attend only moslem schools and will not grow up with children of other religions and none. but if you allow the hajib, you have to allow all religious symbols, and maybe the burkha. how can a teacher teach a pupil when you can only see the eyes? I wouldn't want as a student to have classmates i couldn't see properly. I believe that all schools should be multi denominational with religion kept out of school hours but with only a relative handful of primary state schools in this sector and none(?) in the secondary sector parents have to make big compromises.

This isn't an easy issue. we certainly need an open and honest debate on it.

by pat c Sat Jul 26, 2008 19:02

This article is taken from the website of the International Humanist and Ethical Union. The article is written by Maryam Namazie, an Iranian socialist feminist. Full text at link.

Recent reports on the Islamic regime of Iran’s crackdown on women who are ‘badly’ veiled (bad-hejab) and their resistance to the regime’s campaign of arrest and harassment has been reported quite extensively in comparison to other similar events over the years. This is partly due to amateur video footage taken via mobile phones by passers-by uploaded on YouTube for the world to see.

There are two pieces of footage that everyone should take a look at. One is of an unveiled woman shouting ‘we don’t want the veil; we want freedom’. The other is of a young girl who is being questioned by security agents for being ‘badly veiled’; she pulls off her veil in front of them and is kicked into a waiting car to be driven away. Given that veiling is compulsory in Iran, these acts of defiance are all the more heroic.

The veil is a tool for the suppression and oppression of women. It is meant to segregate. It is representative of how women are viewed in Islam: sub-human, ‘deficient’, ‘inferior’, without rights, and despised. Trapped in a mobile prison not to be heard from or seen.

In many instances it is a matter of life and death. In Iran just recently paramedics were denied access to two sisters who needed emergency assistance because their brother deemed it sinful for the paramedics to touch them. They died as a result. And we have all heard of the example of Saudi Arabia where girls’ schools are locked as usual practice to ensure the segregation of the sexes. In 2002 when a fire broke out at a school in Mecca, the guards would not unlock the gates and religious police prevented girls from escaping – to the point of even beating them back into the school – because they were not properly veiled; moreover they stopped men who tried to help, warning the men that it was sinful to touch the girls. Fifteen girls died as a result and more than fifty were wounded.

As I said – a matter of life and death.

http://www.iheu.org/node/2776

by SecularHarassment Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:13

I'm curious. if a young girl is pressured by her family to wear a hijab. Then the school refuses to let her, where will the SWP stand on the matter??

Personally, I think we need to just remove all religion from our schools altogether in an even handed way.

If people wish to practice a particular religion then fine, but do it outside school grounds. If the rules are the same for everyone then where is the problem in that?

Public funding should not be used to support the perpetuation of any particular religious belief.

The worst offender is still catholicism. One of the reasons is that the church still has the primary schools by the balls and the government doesn't want to have to finance the work they currently do or replace the church owned school premises with publically owned ones. Too expensive...Less public money left for them and their friends to steal.

Schools should be a place of learning and inclusion not daft superstition and religious divisiveness.

BTW, what has religion to do with racism? (apart, of course, from the tendency of some religions to paint jesus white)