The debate on the ban on the veil in public spaces relaunched by the National Rally

As the presidential campaign begins, the National Rally is sparking debate with its promise to sanction the wearing of the veil in public spaces. If this announcement arouses tensions and raises questions about its compatibility with the principle of secularism, the author of the essay The shroud of feminism: caressing Islam in the sense of the veil (Séramis) affirms that it is above all a “question of misogyny, sexism and patriarchy”.

Also read Islam, veil, immigration… The Laurent Nuñez method sows trouble

According to him, secularism is invoked to divert the debate from its true ground: “By giving the impression that the veil is worn in the name of religion, it should be respected.” Thus, the prescribers of the veil, just like the women who wear it, would be considered victims of a form of ostracization if the ban came into force.

Skip the ad

The real question is what society do we want to live in?

“If we bring the veil back to the field of inequality between the sexes, the prescribers of the veil come across as executioners,” says Naëm Bestandji. According to him, this is an important semantic shift, to the extent that opponents of the veil would lose the battle if they only invoked the principle of secularism. “The real subject is misogyny, and the question is what society we want to live in,” underlines the author.

From a practical point of view, the guest on Bienvenue en Île-de-France also considers it “ridiculous to want to ban the wearing of the veil in the name of equality between the sexes”, because the police would have difficulty enforcing such a measure. “On a philosophical level, we cannot prohibit people from dressing as they wish, even if it is an expression of oppression of women. If some women agree to submit to it, it is not through the law that we will change things. On the contrary, we will make them martyrs.”