Nijab

Mar 04, 2010 03:59

Apparently the Quebec government supported an ultimatum requiring a woman to remove her veil in order to continue to receive French lessons in Quebec. (link to G & M story)  The argument, or one of the arguments, was that it was harder to teach her pronunciation without being able to see her lips move.  This strikes me as an odd basis for the insistence.  For one thing, surely it's possible to simply demonstrate the proper lip movement to the woman without also requiring to see her lips move.   And if not, why can't she continue to receive instruction anyway?  If learning pronunciation is the goal, why can't they simply evaluate her on whether she learns to pronounce correctly?  (I took French lessons in high school and I don't recall much, if any,  time being spent having the teacher watch my lips move and giving me feedback about that, but, what do I know, maybe that's why my pronunciation sucks.)   The article also notes that people were complaining  that she needed to talk more to men in the class, but it's unclear to me how insisting on niqab removal would address that.

But this is good for a laugh:  "many commentators rushed to suggest she was a provocateur enlisted by Islamist extremists"   I can see it now, "Ah, yes, we will bring you down, decadent Canada.  We will have a woman wear a niqab to French class and refuse to remove it.  The air of mystery about her will infuriate you and make you crazy and then you will violate your alleged commitments to human rights and tolerance."   BAHAHAHAHAHA!

Update: To show my commitment to multiculturalism and diversity, I fixed my misspellings of 'niqab'.

immigration, women, human rights

Previous post Next post
Up