The France Veil Ban

The article discusses the ban of wearing naqab and burka by women in public places. Pioneered by the then president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, the French government introduced a legislation in 2010 that would prohibit concealment of faces by women in public places. The president argued that the law is nothing but a protection of a person’s dignity, with particular reference to women, and a promotion of openness ask demanded of any citizen in a republic. Other reasons that the government used to justify the legislation were to cut down on Islam extremism and enable easy security identification.

            No matter the way this kind of rationalization is looked at, it complicates a very simple reality. Prohibiting the naqab and burka, even if based on emancipation of women, assimilation or civility, it is clearly an act of religious discrimination.

            It is a known fact that secularism is a culture embedded in the roots of France as a nation. The culture defines the nation and is some way the government wishes every citizen to live as per this culture. The government fights, if not to re-establish the old French culture, at least to maintain the current state of affairs. People across all walks of lives have looked at the French veil ban as a clandestine plan to restrict the spread of the Islam culture, which is considered as a threat to the nation’s culture. This is clear from a parliamentarian committee established  to investigate the law, whom after six months of discussion came out to condemn the veil as a threat to the nation. In their statement, they supported the fact that the veil should not be allowed in public places.

Although one may argue that, a country has the full rights of dictating how immigrants get assimilated into their country, France appears to be intolerant against the Islam culture. Whatever way one would want to be support the law, the fact remains that those who will pay the $185 fine will be in almost all cases Muslim women, who in their act of wearing the veil are honoring a dictate by their religion. It is undisputable that this women will face discriminated on the grounds that by living by their faith, they will not only be subject to a fine imposed by the government but also remove their veil at police checks for identification.

            Another way to look at it is the fact that these women, by wearing their religious veils breach no one’s rights. The argument that the veils can be used to conceal criminals does not refute this fact. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that, every individual has freedom of choice for their conscience, religion and thoughts. With that in mind, it would have been better for the government to encourage tolerance and moderation instead of imposing repression. In fact, on basis of human psychology, the most effective way of pushing more women into wearing veils is to tell them they cannot.

Intolerance can be defined as the inability or unwillingness to come into terms with opinions, behavior or beliefs that are dissimilar to one’s own. The French government and the public, being the majority, fail to allow Muslim women, who are the minority, to live in a way that goes against their secular culture.

Question #2

In his article, on the Golden rule with relation to sympathy and empathy, Bennet explores how the rule causes an obstruction in the path of intercultural understanding. Many people hypothesize from the rule that there exists only one way of looking at the world. The result is a situation referred to as ethnocentrism, which is essentially a characteristic behavior of people looking at others through the lens of their own customs and group as the reference scale.

Associated to this way of thinking is a communication strategy known as sympathy, which is the assumption of similarity. Here, a person assumes that how he or she feels in a situation is how the other person feels which is not necessarily true. The idea that there exists an ideal and standard attitude towards things is the stem of sympathy. The French assume they are in possession of this attitude, the standard of dressing that they support as the ideal one. They fail terribly to understand that the other individual, the Muslims, do not hold the same feelings and thoughts as theirs

            Contrary to sympathy, empathy is a communication strategy where we try to put ourselves in other’s shoes and participate in their reality that is different from ours. This is the basis of a constructive intercultural communication. For instance, if one is unsure of how to treat another individual, he or she will imagine the kind of treatment they will wish for in the same situation and then act in accordance to that.

            Empathy, in the article of discussion, is seen when the French Catholic Church boldly condemns the ban on veils claiming that it directly attacks the beliefs of French Muslims. They further state that owing to such kind of treatment, Islam countries would feel less obliged to respect religious beliefs of their minorities. According to the Catholic Church, the French would not have expected a similar ban to be imposed to them if they were in the position of Muslims.

Read more: http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/07/22/204506345/burka-ban-stirs-another-round-of-clashes-in-france

Question #3

1. Prejudice

Prejudice is a very common problem associated with intercultural communication. By definition, prejudice is a judgment stemming from a past experience but not the current circumstances which in most cases are relevant. Prejudice lays emphasis on “my” values and notions instead of “your” notions. In the past, women have been victims of cultural oppression. Nonetheless, it is a form of prejudice to view wearing of veils as oppressing. Instead it should be seen as value that conforms to the Muslim moral standards.

• Ethnocentrism

As defined above, ethnocentrism is the tendency of imposing one’s culture as the reference scale for every other thing. This is a hindrance to intercultural communication. The French force it on Muslims that their own culture, Secularism, is the only culture allowed in France.

• Assimilation

This is the problem of giving up one’s culture for another. As many other majority cultures would do or are expected to do, although wrong, the French try to assimilate Muslims by insisting on dropping their culture.

• Unequal power

If the Muslims had the same influence and power as the government, it would not have been easy to impose the veil ban on them. Inequality in power is a problem for intercultural communication.

• Cultural stereotyping

Across the whole of Europe, Muslim immigration has been viewed as a problem. This results from a commonly held stereotype that Islam is an extremist religion. Most probably, most countries, including France, was fed this stereotype from other countries.

Part 2:

Question #1

International immigration inevitably creates both an ethnically and culturally diverse society. People from these different communities have no option but to face different belief systems, behavior, values and customs. Unfortunately, prejudice also arises from these differences. The following three ways can be effective in promoting intercultural competence and awareness.

1. Guarding against ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism is an inner conviction that one’s culture has superiority over other cultures. Ethnocentrism greatly hinders the process of adapting to other cultures, which in turn leads to prejudice. When in excess, mistrust, hate and even hostility are the result (Cai, 2010). It affects both the immigrants and hosts. To undergo a seamless cultural integration, both parties have to be aware of the effects of ethnocentrism and try to avoid them.

• Learning about the host culture

Developing knowledge on other cultures is an important aspect in improving cultural awareness. Troubles associated with culture shock and adaptation are less likely to affect an individual who has invested time in learning about other’s culture.

Cultural awareness is a deep understanding of other people’s religious orientation, historical background, political system, values, beliefs, both verbal and nonverbal behavior, social etiquette, organization of their family and many other vital facets of their lives. It is said, once we understand their different styles and norms, they are just like us (Schollon and Schollon, 2001).

• Maintaining your own culture

When moving to another culture, the differences can be overwhelming. This way adapting to the new culture becomes almost impossible. To avoid such a situation, working to maintain one’s own culture is vital. The only way to achieve this is to find other people who share your culture and spend a considerable amount of time with them (Musolff, Macarthur, and Pagani, 2014).

Question #2

Looking at the memoir I wrote before, it is apparent that there is something different now. After coming to this country, I was overexcited about the new culture, and for once, I thought I would seamlessly fit in. Nevertheless, that was not to occur as the effects of culture shock set in. At some point, I felt out place and often felt unaccepted in this new land. I felt homesick and even thought my home is the only place where I could stay.

It was distressful and many questions came into my mind. However, after participating in this class, I have a whole new look at the situation. It is very clear to me right now that culture shock is a very normal aspect when moving to a new culture. What I went through was completely normal and there was nothing wrong with me or the people of this country. It is normal for humans to treat people who are different from them with prejudice.

Currently, I have adapted to this new culture. A new comfort that was not in existent before has set in. However, I am aware that I could have achieved this if I handled things differently in accordance to what I have learnt in this class.

Since I understand that other people will always be different from us, in future, I will handle foreigners differently to protect them from feeling the same way as me. I will be appreciative to their culture and try to learn their culture to ease our interaction. Of course, I will have my beliefs but I will keep them in check with the goal of improving intercultural competence.

Question #3

My name is. China is my home country in which I reside in Guangdong Province, Canton. It is a prosperous and beautiful city and in turn, I love it. I have spent 18 years in Canton. I went to one of the best high schools in the city in which I met great people including teachers and classmates. Being around such warm people, the environment modelled to expect a warm treatment from people.

Mandarin is my first language but I am also well acquainted with Cantonese. Being an international student here, English is my second language. I do not have the expertise in the language as a native speaker but I put in the best of my efforts.

My wish to learn a lot from the world while young catapulted my choice of studying abroad. Additionally, I looked at the US with much admiration and even considered it a better country than my native country china. With my amateur imagination, I naively expected every person in the US to be friendly towards me. I have never been to a foreign country before so I did not have the full knowledge of cultural differences.

After staying here for some time, it was apparent that my imagination was not correct at all. Nevertheless, after learning different lesson in this class, my eyes look at this country through different lenses. Having friends from different cultures who went through the same experiences of cultural shock as me was helpful in making me feel better about myself. I am able to look beyond cultural differences. That has been a key aid in helping me get along with the American lifestyle and general way of life. With that, I do not regret studying abroad.

Having friends from different cultures who went through the same experiences of cultural shock as me was helpful in making me feel better about myself.

Work cited

Cai, Deborah A. Intercultural Communication. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2010. Print.

Scollon, Ronald, and Suzanne B. K. Scollon. Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. Malden: Blackwell, 2001. Print.

Musolff, Andreas, Fiona Macarthur, and Giulio Pagani. Metaphor and Intercultural Communication. N.p., 2014. Print.