This article consists of two separate posts, originally published on 15 October 2005 and 14 March 2007 on blog.luxzenburg.org. They are republished here together as a historical document and reflect the author’s views at those moments.
I. The Burqa Ban (October 2005)
The Dutch parliament has voted in favour of banning the burqa in public spaces. As a Dutch person and as a Muslim, I find myself wondering what the advantages and democratic justification for this ban are.
Let me be clear from the outset: I believe the burqa — a garment invented centuries after the death of our beloved Prophet — is not Islamic at all. The choice to wear one rests entirely with the woman, or she has submitted to the will of her husband. I have no opinion, except that I would certainly never allow my partner to wear one — if I were allowed to permit or forbid her anything, which in my humble opinion I am not: man and woman are equal before Allah, as the Quran states.
But my objection is directed at the ban itself. The Netherlands claims to be a democracy, but actions like this — driven by far-right conservatives — only prove that the Netherlands is being occupied by cowardly neo-Nazi fascists. In Amsterdam, a man has for years been walking around in his thong, virtually naked. That is permitted. But covering yourself fully is banned? Have we all become paranoid, or simply openly anti-Muslim?
I also disagree with nudity in public spaces, but that is not banned in the Netherlands. I can imagine that certain groups do not appreciate how some gay people dress during the Gay Pride — but that is not banned either. Should our sisters then organise a Muslimah pride to win the right to wear a garment they consider Islamic?
Who is the Dutch government to decide what is Islamically correct? Who is Geert Wilders to decide what is good for Muslims in the Netherlands? I am certain he is not doing it for the sake of Islamic women. He is doing it against Islam, as he tries every meaningless, idiotic idea to irritate Muslims and frustrate Islam. I urge my brothers and sisters not to attack him physically — that is exactly what people like him want. We can only protest through words and defend our democratic rights through democratic means.
II. The Burqa Ban, Revisited (March 2007)
Geert Wilders wants a burqa ban. It is elaborately explained what that would entail. Coalition partner CDA wants something similar, but packages it more neutrally as a blanket ban on face-covering clothing — including full-face motorcycle helmets.
What nonsense.
In Amsterdam, a man has for years been skateboarding in his thong, virtually naked. That is permitted. But covering yourself fully is banned? Have we all become paranoid, or just openly anti-Muslim?
And the motorcycle helmet argument makes no sense. Have you ever seen someone walking around in a full-face helmet, other than a motorcyclist? And then only because it is compulsory. Will the police now stop motorcyclists for violating the law on face-covering clothing? That the CDA supports proposals like this demonstrates democratic bankruptcy.
I know no Muslims who wear the burqa. I do know women who wear a headscarf, and many more who wear nothing at all. So we are talking about an exceptionally small group of women. And politics is falling over itself to address this? Let them focus on serious matters. Or at least on the ninety percent of Muslims in the Netherlands who function exactly as society wishes. By scrutinising the small minority of burqa wearers and so-called jihadists under a magnifying glass, you send a negative signal to a large group. That is precisely what Wilders wants. But can the coalition honestly support that?