Where is the line drawn between choice and coercion? At what point is a person's decision the result of free will as opposed to a lifetime of indoctrination?
Many husbands in Iran recently launched a social media campaign to express solidarity with their wives, who have been forced by the country's laws since the 1979 Islamic revolution to wear headscarves in public. In many instances, these women wish nothing more than to remove the restrictive garment to enjoy some of life's simplicities such as feeling the cool wind rushing through their hair on a hot day. Denying a person such a harmless yet pleasant experience does seem rather excessive.
This begs the question as to how women living under oppressive regimes want to be free from such ridiculous regulations while others who come to free countries actually claim to willfully impose it upon themselves.
I've always been strongly in favour of free will and choice — so long as a person's actions or beliefs do not in any shape, way or form harm or incite violence against others, that individual should be allowed to think whatever he or she wants.
I've even in the past defended, and still would defend, the small minority of women in Canada who would choose to wear the headscarf — if it truly is their heartfelt choice and decision that they arrived at themselves and not as the result of threats and intimidation.
But when I start to read about how women in a strict regime like Iran wish to be free from the veil — and even have their husbands' unwavering support — I can't help but to wonder what would convince a woman living in a free country like Canada to voluntarily impose upon herself something her religion does not even technically call for.
Although the Koran does encourage people to live and dress modestly — not surprising as no religion promotes a life of shameless vanity — the text does not explicitly command that woman cover up head-to-toe. That aspect is a perversion created by power-hungry despots and clearly insecure men who very liberally interpreted the notion of dressing modestly as the need to completely cover up.
I've read in several instances online that the idea behind a full body covering for women is the notion that no one would find appealing an unwrapped treat in the streets.
Let's stop right there.
Women are not inanimate objects to be compared with candy or any other consumable product.
They are human beings with hopes, dreams, aspirations, feelings as well as — believe it or not — thoughts and ideas of their own.
I hope and want to believe that women in free countries like Canada who choose to wear the veil truly do so from their own personal convictions and not because they've been coerced since childhood into believing they are just a piece of candy to be wrapped up.
At any rate, they seem to take for granted the fact that while they actually get to choose to wear the veil, many Muslim women who would clearly prefer not to, do not have the luxury of that choice.
Simon Ducatel is the editor of the Sundre Round Up.
