Politics of the Veil

Amy Novotny

14172530

Politics of the Veil:

1.     Despite reservations about the headscarf, the political scientist Mossuz-Lavau argues against the law to ban headscarves. What is at the crux of her argument? Is it valid? (162)

a.      She says she was deprived of the sexual liberation that was hers by right.

2.     What are the implications when we talk about bringing Muslim women up to the standard of their French sisters (or western sisters)? (172)

a.      They said that By rising up against foreign signs of sexism, doesn’t our society prove that it wont tolerate sexism? The conclusive evidence of the inassimilability of Muslims was the difference of their approach to sex and sexuality.

3.     How does the author come to the conclusion that “rather than resolving the problem of integrating Muslims into French society, the law banning headscarves has exacerbated it”? (179)

a.      Because it is saying the problems are still there. Women still aren’t getting jobs from it. Women are still being treated differently. The example given about the woman at the bank and how a teller refused to wait on her is simply sad, but it shows the problem is still there.