Problematizing "Autonomy" and "Tradition" with Regard to Veiling: A Reponse to Seval Yildirim

[[{"type":"media","view_mode":"media_large","fid":"641","attributes":{"alt":"","class":"media-image","data-thmr":"thmr_7 thmr_8","height":"200","typeof":"foaf:Image","width":"266"}}]]

A recent New York Times editorial characterized the 2010 decision by the French Senate to ban face-covering veils as “government-enforced bigotry.” Readers reacted by either applauding the French move (seen as “helping some of the most powerless women participate more fully as equal citizens”2), or by condemning it in the strongest terms — actually comparing the French to the Taliban.3 These responses reflect the polarization of public  opinion when it comes to such matters. They also relate to themes raised in Yildirim’s paper, namely, veiled Muslim women “seeking to participate in public space,” and the role of states in regulating dress codes.