Leslie,

Good and timely article,

A minor correction however, your assumption of Hijab being social pressure by men or fathers is valid in some cases. Large number of women chooses to wear it for orthodoxy and compliance and it is irrelevant whether a husband or father approves it or not.

Another myth I would like to correct is the meaning of Hijab as a dress code is for men and women to dress moderately of what is non-transparent and non-descriptive of the body. It is not women only and it is not headscarf only. The hijab, for example, cannot be a headscarf on a tight jeans.

Peace,

As usual a well reasoned article, no wonder Leslie Cannold is the thinking woman's hero.

State schools often have a poster that says something like "You have no say over where you come from, what happened in the past but you are responsible for your actions and your future".

In Australia girls aged 3 are sometimes forced to wear hijab - that headscarf marks them apart from their neighbours and if its worn with flowing dress will restrict their movement, their ability to climb trees, run, play in the creek, hone their hand to eye coordination. In the most extreme circumstances moslem female garb works to isolate women from the world that surrounds them. In Morrocco when women meet inside their homes they remove their hijab.

As hijab is something that moslem women can elect to adopt at puberty, I see no problem with banning it from school uniform, and when the young women leave school then they can adopt hijab if that is still their desire.

As a woman who was denied a home loan because of gender, I fear that women who adopt hijab will be prejudged as second class citizens and find their life choices are set by their clothing.

I agree that the school calandar timetablers could set school holidays to show more sensitivity to Jewish and Muslim as well as Christian holy days but in the final analysis it might not be relevant for Tasmanian schools to observe Jewish holidays given the size of that religious group in that state.

Just because the hijab is a symbol of cultural oppression in some countries does not mean it cannot be a symbol of secular oppression if it is banned in this country. I don’t suppose you watched the sbs documentary on the implementation of the policy in France, you would have realised that these young girls are fighting for their right to respect their god. How would you like it if churches were shutdown to prevent Christians not mixing with people of other religions on Sundays?

What you people seem to forget is that Muslims pay taxes as well so what right do you have to say that they cannot respect their god in these schools.

In conclusion, if you ban the hijab in public schools you will be no better than those who stone to death women for not wearing it.

The whys and wherefores of wearing a headscarf are irrelevant. Muslims put around so many conflicting arguments for it - it's required by Allah, it's my choice and so on - that we will never know the reasons they really wear the things. And, who cares anyway?

What is relevant is that, while there is probably no problem with anyone wearing what they wish in their private lives, there is a problem with immigrants and minorities not conforming with the standards and requirements of the host population, in the way of school uniforms, for instance. Muslim children attending private schools are not permitted by those schools to wear any item of apparel not to conforming to school uniform standards, just like any other child. If one group of Muslims can conform, so can the others. But, in the case of school uniform in state schools, it seems that the 'compulsory' wearing of uniforms is pure bluff.

With lefty teachers and ALP state governments, a few Muslim kids, like a few mainstream kids, kick over the traces and challenge the system and get away with it, and the public education drifts further into chaos.

Some people are sick and tired of the headscarf business, and this is understandable. But while it is used as a symbol, there will always be conjecture. Let's hope it doesn't turn into anything worse.

DLC, I really could not care about the hijab but enforcing school uniforms is not the same as closing churches. Banning christian kids from wearing christian tee shirts at school might be a better example.

For all involved in the debate it should be remembered that society regularly limits the freedom of individuals to dress as they choose. I noticed in the paper on the weekend that Sunshine Coast police have been prosecuting nude bathers at what sounds like a fairly secluded beach. Just because something is dressed up as religion it should carry no more weight than anothers choices.

R0bert

If we take as a given the hypothesis that these girls have highly religious parents or that they are repressed second-class citizens in their community, then I think we have to accept also that banning hijabs (in state funded schools) might result in

- more muslim girls going to a religious idependent schools
- some muslim girls getting sub-standard home schooling
- some muslim parents resisting the orders facing
legal battles and even jail

None of these outcomes seem positive. I'd suggest that the only families that would quietly accept a ban might be those who are "moderate" in the first place.

In short, I argue that the proposal is potentially deterimental to the community and the girls in question.