Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 24, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size


The Key to 2014




The Divide


Truthdig Bazaar
Time of Useful Consciousness

Time of Useful Consciousness

By Lawrence Ferlinghetti
$22.95

more items

 
A/V Booth

The French Are the Best Protesters in the World

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 5, 2010

In protest of France’s controversial face veil ban, two students pulled on niqabs and hot pants and went stomping around Paris.

More on the story over at The Washington Post.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Samson's avatar

By Samson, October 8, 2010 at 11:15 am Link to this comment

In America, those women would be facing ten year sentences for terrorist nudity.

—————-
The only difference in dress codes between the Afghanistan Muslim Taliban and the American Christian Taliban concerns the covering of the head.

Both would want these women flogged in public for showing their legs.  But, I guess at least the Afghani Taliban would be happy that their faces were covered.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, October 7, 2010 at 3:24 pm Link to this comment

So I assume, diamond, you are fighting for my right to wear a balaclava into my credit union, right? (In case you’re not aware of it, in my rural state you are not allowed to go into a financial institution even wearing a hoodie with the hood up.) I’m sorry, bustles and crazy hats and high heels are not the same as a garment which makes you completely unidentifiable. And, by the way, bustles and crazy hats, as you put it, were not worn by the majority of women who were busy laboring in fields and factories. They were fashions which made it plain the woman wearing them did not have to work.

I don’t care if banning garments which make you unidentifiable is done with unpleasant motives. I totally disagree with banning head scarves in schools, etc, but I still stand by banning garments which make it impossible to see the person’s face.

Report this

By diamond, October 7, 2010 at 2:17 pm Link to this comment

You’re missing the point Tobysgirl. Did women stop wearing bustles because some politician said they had to? Did they stop wearing crazy hats because someone passed a decree? No. They stopped because their society changed and they wanted to ride horses, climb mountains and become athletes and bustles and crazy hats didn’t go with it. Muslim women will stop wearing these things when their societies change - and they will because change is the law of life, no matter how much men want to keep their privileged position. To force them to conform in another society is a form of oppression and is something politicians like Sarkozy use as a political football to divide the community and fan the flames of ethnic and religious hatred. It’s just another form of burning the Koran and is not based on concern for the women but hatred of difference,  religious intolerance and political opportunism.

Report this
Allan Krueger's avatar

By Allan Krueger, October 7, 2010 at 8:40 am Link to this comment

Silly, but, provocative!

Report this

By Tobysgirl, October 7, 2010 at 8:28 am Link to this comment

Since the niqab is prescribed for women because women inflame men’s passions to such a degree that they must be out of sight (talk about dehumanization), I’m not sure I found wearing it with bare legs and high heels very funny. Until you defend the right of any of us to wear balaclavas into the bank, I don’t want to hear about wearing niqabs being women’s “right.” How nauseating when a symbol of oppression becomes something to demonstrate FOR.

Report this

By lexicron, October 6, 2010 at 6:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Hot pants”? Your caption writer’s fashion dictionary is stuck in the 1970s.

Report this

By diamond, October 6, 2010 at 1:52 pm Link to this comment

What woman likes to be called a bitch? A woman I know during a heated row with her husband was called a bitch. She looked him in the eye and said, “I’m not a bitch, I’m THE bitch.’ Some women wear it as a badge of honour. To them it means, gutsy, brave, being a troublemaker, being a feminist. How is it defamatory to stand up and say ‘I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore’? Who are these overpaid politicians who think they can tell women what they can wear? Whether it’s the mini-skirt, the trouser suit or the niqab it’s just the same old patriarchy trying to pretend its protecting women while it oppresses them. The ban the burqa/niqab thing is just a political ploy to divide the electorate and create fear and these women are saying ‘Screw you, politicians who lie every time you open your mouths. You don’t fool me.’ Fair enough, I say.

Report this

By faith, October 6, 2010 at 10:39 am Link to this comment

Hilarious !  Sooooo, very French !  The french definitely have their own sense of
decorum and style and just the thought of those young french women donning a
niquab, yet showing a ‘little leg’ is absolutely perfect.  No matter - french women
have style !

Report this
Lafayette's avatar

By Lafayette, October 6, 2010 at 3:23 am Link to this comment

Niqabitch is what we call “franglais”, the idiomatic melange of French and English. You should know that this expression, however, has two manners in which it can be understood.

First of all, the Niqab is the veil some Muslim women wear. So why this and the word “bitch” are linked is not at all understandable for women supposedly demonstrating for the religious right to wear a niqab. What woman likes to be called a bitch?

Secondly, “niquer” is a French slang for “to screw” in the sexual sense. So the phrase can be understood as “Screw the bitch”. Thus the phrase translates in a defamatory fashion in either meaning.

Which is why, I, who live in France and watches the news programs, never saw this on French TV—where it should have been picked up and viewed (and where it would inspire a long debate replete with useless blather.) Want to know why it never made it to prime-time TV?

Because defamatory remarks are NOT subsumed under the title of “freedom of speech” in this nation that signed the UN Declaration of Human Rights (which, btw, the US signed but never ratified). Neither should they be in the US, where they are used with wild abandon in many (if not most) sound-bite political commercials.

One must assume therefore that spending hundreds of millions dollars on TV advertising for the purpose of calling your opponent a “first class dork” constitutes intelligent exchange of opinion furthering the delicate political process of selecting the most suitable candidate for election.

Me arse it is. (English-english slang, left to your imagination for its meaning.)

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.