• 1

If you thought the first one was problematic


so I wanted to write something quickly about this the first time I saw it which was before your current post. I believe you linked to it previously?

My reaction was very mixed. Near the beginning of the clip I felt like the attitude was pure mockery of a culture's values. After a little time elapsed and I saw them outside official government buildings I began to feel that the film was mocking the "values" of it's concerned government. Questions were raised I believe to poke holes in the principles behind the anti-niqab laws. The big one being, if the law is supposed to free the "oppressed" women and protect their right to flaunt their bodies, if muslim women covering their faces simultaneously chose to flaunt their sexy legs and flirt with "regular" french folk, would the law be obsolete?

--Mary Ann


I *love* your essay.

There is so much in it, that I fear that any comment I make will be reductionist, but let me explore a very incidental point.

Besides all the political-social-religious-gender role-etc. aspects how much does simple comformist aesthetic pressure plays ? Maybe the perception of something as ugly/attractive might have a larger influence on the perception as right/wrong than people would like to admit ? This could explain a little part of the difference in cultural attitudes towards the niqab: some might find it attractive, alluring; some might find it ugly, disgracious. Is the "beautiful is righteous" fallacy at play ?

I agree. It's interesting that you should post this because two of my friends commented that I forgot to discuss that they are HOT legs. Obviously that's an essential part of the response the women evoke within the video and an important part of the effect of the video.

I don't know why I didn't think much about that.

  • 1
?

Log in