Would You Want Your Kid To Be Taught By Somebody Wearing a Veil?
Thursday, October 19, 2006Posted in: Uncategorized
Sacked for refusing to renove her veil whilst teaching kids
Today, this teacher lost her discrimination case. She was sacked for wearing a veil to school, so she took her case to an employment tribunal.
She was asked to remove the veil whilst teaching school children, and she refused.
I completely agree with the ruling, but I’m not a lily-livered liberal when it comes to shit like this.
Being an ethnic minority person myself, I think I’m well within my rights to say that wearing such a veil, whilst teaching non-Muslim children, is utter bullshit. I have no respect for religion, so my views probably shouldn’t be so surprising.
I don’t give a toss how good a teacher she is, if I had a child in her class, I’d complain as a parent. I pretty much hate all organised religion, but I think the emphasis when it comes to this case, is more on the veil itself, than the religious connotations. It’s a barrier to teaching, pure and simple. And nobody will be able to convince me otherwise.
The liberal lefties are of course up in arms about it, as you would expect them to be. How dare they take away her right to wear what she wants? How dare they disregard her religion in such a fashion? It’s all fucking bullshit. Even the Muslim Council of Britain said it was wrong for her to insist on covering her face.
She can wear what she wants, but not whilst teaching my kid. I’d say the same thing if a teacher decided it was a good idea to wear a miniskirt that showed her crack to all and sundry. It just isn’t fucking cricket.
What say you? It’s ok if you disagree with me, my views can be pretty radical to say the least.
Anonymous
October 19
11:37 pm
Whatever happened to freedom of expression? I think it’s very dangerous to take such a stance. There’s enough suspicion and distrust between Muslims and the rest of the world without something like this becoming a major issue.
We should respect all religions, and make an effort to understand them, whether we agree with them or not. Ridiculing the garb worn by a Muslim woman does verge on being disrespectful, is it any wonder they feel as if the whole world is against them.
Donna
Wendy
October 20
12:34 am
I was taught by a woman who wore mini skirts and panty hose, no undies; by people who didn’t know me from Adam; by a man who taught the back wall, never making eye contact. I could go on and on and on. I don’t see the argument against the woman wearing the veil. It takes all sorts and children certainly know this.
Bam
October 20
12:57 am
oh, I really have nothing to add, except this:
It just isn’t fucking cricket.
Oh, you Brits and your wonderful sayings. I’m going to add that to “I can’t be arsed”.
I love you, man.
eggs
October 20
3:13 am
The main problem with hiding a teacher’s face in the classroom is that kids (and grownups) get subtle facial clues from our teachers that let us know if we are getting it right (or badly wrong) as we try to learn. It doesn’t matter if we’re learning to recite the Kings of England or give a blowjob – the expression on the teacher’s face tells us how well we’re doing.
The face is like a game of “warmer – colder” as we sound out words, try to remember a sequence of actions, or summarize what the main gist of something is. When a teacher hides his or her face s/he is unnecessarily increasing the difficulty of learning in the classroom. If a teacher is putting their personal headwear choices before my child’s education, then I don’t want them in the classroom, period.
FWIW, there are two teachers at my daughter’s preschool who are muslim. They wear the headgear, but not the veil. They are prefectly nice, pleasant chicks who just so happen to have a hard-on for Allah. They are great teachers and my daughter loves them (as do I). People don’t go crazy over religious issues because of their religion, they go crazy over religious issues because they were fricken nutjobs to start with. Sane person + Islam = sane muslim, nutjob+ Islam = uber nutjob.
Rosie
October 20
3:26 am
If the teacher is veiled as shown in your picture I would have a problem with her mouth being covered. The place I get my mani/pedi the staff all wear masks and it is very difficult to understand someone…even with an loud voice because you loose words to articulation. Besides that I don’t have problem with a veil. Nuns have been teaching kids for years and they wear a veil.
Lori
October 20
4:35 am
I agree 100% with what eggs said. I have no problem with the head piece (showing my ignorance, because I have NO idea what it’s called!), but kids need to see their teacher’s face.
One other thing to ponder… I am deaf in one ear. I lip read everyone. If I had had a teacher whose mouth I couldn’t see… I’d have been toast.
reader che
October 20
5:01 am
I’m one of those liberal lefties (American) but I agree with you. There was a case in Florida a few years back about a Muslim woman who didn’t want her driver’s license picture taken without the face covering. I remember thinking at that time, you gotta be fucking kidding me. A driver’s license also serves as your I.D. card.
And hi to Lori- I’m totally deaf in both ears.
Sam
October 20
7:52 am
I’m a flaming liberal – and that means I want equal rights for all. Women don’t have equal rights, and the veil is more a symbol of repression than religion.
The only way women can have equal rights is in a totally secular society (Polly Toynbe wrote an excellent article about this for the UK Guardian)
If the society is completely secular, than there is no more question of discrimination, and no more possibility for men to repress women through controlling what they wear or what they do with their bodies.
You have to remember that only a tony minority of these veiled women actually Choose to wear it. MOST would rather not but feel pressured by family and religion.
Dawn
October 20
10:49 am
When I first heard about this I thought – “Well, the school didn’t have any problem with her wearing the hijab while teaching until another teacher complained, so what’s the problem?” But when I thought about it further, I thought about the fact as you all said that the kids need to see her face, to fully understand what she’s saying, not only with her speech but her expression.
So as far as I’m concerned, she’s done herself out of a job – she could have just taken the veil off while in lessons and put it on when out and about in the rest of the school.
Desiree Erotique
October 20
1:54 pm
I absolutely loathe the idea that certain cultures want women so ashamed of their femininity that they are bound by that culture to hide their faces. I do not feel this way because of any feminist ideals -a lot of feminists would have women ashamed to wear high heels and cosmetics. However, I suspect that this type of ruling can only encourage fear in children and lead them to unconsciously associate these women with everything that the conservative Right wants us to hate. Fear, as we all know, only encourages hatred.
Anonymous
October 20
4:25 pm
“Women don’t have equal rights, and the veil is more a symbol of repression than religion.”
For some Muslim women, this is true. Not all of them, and if this particular women is out teaching, I doubt it’s so with her. Some actually choose to wear it as a statement of modesty, and in keeping with their culture. Some where it as a statement of their religion. And as someone who has worn a hijab — but not a veil — in a culture where it isn’t the norm, lemme tell you it takes a whole hell of a lot of balls to do it.
I really admire women who do…and a lot of the times, you can tell who is wearing a covering because she wants to, and because she has to.
The latter is heartbreaking. So is, I think, having that choice taken away — but that’s the risk run when anyone takes a stance on an issue, particularly religion. I’m not going to be working at a Pig & Pancake anytime soon.
My concern here is whether the ruling is based on the ability of the woman to teach effectively, or just that she was wearing the veil and the veil itself and the statement it made was intolerable. If it’s the former…well, there’s not much to disagree with. I agree, lip-reading would be a problem, as well as reading expression (though the eyes are usually quite expressive) but the veil isn’t heavy enough to muffle voice — you can talk very clearly through it.
My husband works at a private Muslim school, but all of the women only wear hijab, and no veils. I don’t know what their policy would be if someone with a veil applied for a teaching position. Hmm, will have to ask.
katieM
October 21
2:29 am
There’s no way she can be an effective teacher with that much of her face covered. She can only see what’s directly in front of her. What about the darlings off to the side? What about being able to turn quickly to see what’s going on behind her?
I also think that a woman who complete swaths herself in black, including her face, is just scary to look at. She could be hiding anything under those robes. Her expression is a mystery because her eyebrows are covered. Eyebrows are where the expression comes from, not the eye.
Since she clings to her religion so strongly, I wonder if her religion gets in the way of her faith?
Sam
October 21
8:23 am
In secular countries, religion should be a private matter – like sex. If you want to wear a full veil and covering, you can do it at home. But working in a public place should mean adopting a secular posture, only because then everyone is on equal footing, no matter your sex or religion.
I don’t think that religion is bad, however I don’t think it should be used as a political statement. I wouldn’t mind if my children’s teacher wore a complete covering if we lived in Saudi Arabia and she was part of the sect that insists its women wear the niqab. But in France, for example, which prides itself on being a completely secular society, I would certainly object.
BTW – Did you hear that in Morrocco they are passing a law obliging women to take off their veil?
Marianne McA
October 21
9:58 pm
Sam, why do you suppose a totally secular society would be without discrimination?
I’ve personally come to think that there’s a bit of a chicken and egg thing going on – that however much religions like to think of themselves as expressing eternal and unchanging truths – that in practice, because they must be interpreted by people, they tend to reflect the society from which they spring. I’m a Christian, so my experience would all be of Christianity – and it just seems to me that as society has changed, the ‘truth’ that people find in the Bible changes. If women are second-class citizens, the Bible – read one way – endorses that view. If they’re equal, the Bible can be read to show that too. So I’m suggesting that religion may not be the cause of oppression – though I can accept that it might be a means of lending discriminatory practices a veneer of respectability. But I do wonder if a secular society [if such a thing were possible] would be ipso facto non-discriminatory. I’m thinking of China – which is stupid, because I know very little about China – but it seemed to be a country that tried to avoid religiosity, and yet you still heard stories about a societal preference for boys over girls.
Meljean: as I understand it, the ruling was based on the fact that the veil affected her ability to work as a bi-lingual assistant. She was awarded a small amount of damages. She was prepared to remove the veil when there were no adult males in the room. There was also a degree of discussion about the fact that she hadn’t worn the veil at the interview for the post.
Sam
October 22
11:50 am
I didn’t say an athiest society – I said secular – one where the separation of church and state are complete – where there is no religion in public life (schools, government, etc.)
Marianne McA
October 22
9:23 pm
Yeah, I hadn’t made that differentiation. Sorry. Even so – why would a totally secular society be non-discriminatory?
Is the theory that all discrimination stems from religious beliefs? Or is that as long as a State allows respect for a non-rational set of beliefs to influence it’s decision-making process, that weakness will be open to exploitation by those who would be discriminatory?
Did I completely misunderstand you? Reading your post over, perhaps you weren’t saying that a totally secular society would ipso facto be non-discriminatory – but rather that it would only be possible to achieve a non-discriminatory society in a totally secular context. So all secular states may not be non-discriminatory, but all non-discriminatory states will be secular.
Just really curious about how the argument runs.
Sam
October 23
7:14 am
Oh gosh – now I have to really think about it, lol.
Actually, I live in France, which tries to be a totally secular government in that it tries (doesn’t always succeed) in separating church and state. Therefore the ban on veils in schools and for federal workers (note – not a total ban on veilms, women can go around veiled from head to toe if they want, as long as they are not in school or working for the government) and the French have tried to make women’s rights an issue, which is nice because there is a lot to be done.
The fact is, there are still holidays which are religious (though most people are in favor of abolishing them and calling them ‘winter holiday’ or some such thing. When a society has religion mixed in with its government, then it is nearly impossible to have a non-discriminatory (and yes, I know I probably spelled that wrong, lol)government because most religions put women in second place. The Sharia law, for example, states quite clearly that a woman is worth half of a man, and her word counts for half of a man’s word, which is why it’s so hard to press charges for rape. You need a witness willing to speak up for you if you’re a woman.
Any government that is influenced by most religions will be negative towards women’s rights to abortion and divorce, for example. A secular government will have no problems with those issues, which is why women should really push for secular governments, no matter what religion they are.
Women’s rights to choose means she is not forced into any decision because of religious pressure (i.e. – wearing the veil, taking birth control, reporting a rape…)
Marianne McA
October 23
9:40 pm
Thanks, Sam. I feel evil for taking up your surfing time by asking for explanations – it was just such an interesting aside.
Have to think about it now. I’d be instinctively in favour of a complete separation of church & state – I’m less convinced that all religious women would choose to live in a State with Western liberal values, rather than a state that enforced the precepts of their faith.
But thanks, it will be fascinating to try to think through.
[I’ll let Karen get back to talking about really important things – like good books.]
Sam
October 24
6:23 am
you’re very welcome – I like discussions and my husband is only good for discussing football, lol!
marilacroix
October 27
4:43 pm
I think this teacher wearing her head piece is fine. I wouldn’t mind my kids being taught by a teacher who wore her veil. The kids are there to learn what she has to say rather than judging a person on her looks anyway. I believ that is part of the belief a well, to be judged by what is on the inside as opposed to the outside. I much rather have my girls tolerant of cultures and beliefs than developing prejudice. It is hard enough these days to teach kids to not judge by stereotying. Seems like the racial group changes each generation where people are taught to distrust and hate.