Browsing All Cartoons
Oppression? Tradition?

Oppression? Tradition?

This week, France has officially banned the burqa. In other countries in Europe, like the Netherlands, there are political debates about banning this and other types of veils and clothing Muslim women wear. We run the risk of applying a double standard in Europe, a standard where everything Muslim is oppressive and wrong, while everything Christian or Jewish is part of the European tradition and history. Click here for more cartoons on women's rights.

14 Apr 2011



Comments

greaaaaaaaaaaaaaat Jean , really I like it

14 Apr 2011

Fantastic...thanks ,Jean.

14 Apr 2011

I like it. Great one!

14 Apr 2011

Great work. I like the facial expressions a lot.

14 Apr 2011

Thank you all for you votes and remarks ! Never thought that my cartoon would bring up so many reactions and votes....

13 Apr 2011

Ehhh TJEERD, yes, I write a lot with two GEERTS!

13 Apr 2011

Jean, I think that's a Freudian spelling error ;)

13 Apr 2011

Thank you Geert you made my point/angle very clear... it is indeed about the double standards used by the anti-Islam party's.

13 Apr 2011

I agree, the skirt thing would be more relevant-but less strong as an image. p.s.: My cartoon-debate-brain feels a cartoon about oppressed boy scouts in the making :D .

13 Apr 2011

I'd be tempted to say yes...but that must be my anti-authoritarian streak ;) I see your point, but some of the best cartoons use exaggeration to make a point. The comparison that is closer to real life is a women wearing a skirt because of her faith (we have a bible belt in the Netherlands, and area were many orthodox christians live; they even have their own political party, no women member's allowed). I think in the main it's about the double standard we are creating in Europe: everything muslim is oppressive and worng, while everything christian or jewish is part of the European tradition and history.

13 Apr 2011

Ι understand the concept and am partially aware of the debate. I still find the concept of nun uncomparable to the average member of a religion-they are the hardcore part, the Delta's of Catholicism, if you will. Anyone belonging to a strict clothing rule club would be evenly (un)suitable for comparisson. Would we characterize an army soldier as "oppressed/tradition"? A boy scout? A ninja?

13 Apr 2011

@Spiros @Miguel In the Netherlands, a heated debat, started by the unfortunately popular anti-islam party, is about the veil many muslim women wear (so not the all-covering burqa, but just the head scarf covering the hair). Many say that it should be banned because it is a sign of the oppression of women within islam. Many muslim women argue that they wear it by their own choice, just like the nun's who choose to devote their life to their faith. That's what I think the debate should be about: I think everyone agrees that women should not be oppressed in any way, but is banning certain items of clothing really a solution? And, if we do that, don't we run the risk of applying a very double standard (as Jean's cartoon brilliantly shows)?

13 Apr 2011

First of all, congratulations Jean for what seems to be so far a high score in the present site (older members correct me if i'm wrong, still impressive number!)And an excellent artwork :-) Miguel's point is what immediately popped into my mind as well: nuns are volunteer members extreme ascetism and hardly a part of mainstream society (if I wanted to be funny I would say they are "nun exclusive") . As such they cannot characterize the image of all catholic women, not even the majority of them. Oppresion is hardly the word to label (even by association, as in this case) what is after all an active and volunteer choise, so indeed we see two unrelated concepts in the cartoon.

13 Apr 2011

One of the points that Miguel makes is that this cartoon shows a hijab, which is a scarf that does NOT cover the face; the other types, the burqua and the niqab, DO cover everything except the eyes (these are what the French law bans). I don't know the percentages of women who wear each type voluntarily or non-voluntarily, but I suspect the ones that allow eyes-only to be seen are less of a voluntary choice. In the U.S., the burqua and the niqab have caused problems for such things as drivers license photographs, which must show what the individual's face looks like. The hijab in this cartoon, which does not cover the face, wouldn't have the same effect at least as far as U.S. and French governmental rules.

13 Apr 2011

Hi Jean. I'm not religious either, my point here is to what extension can we consider a clothing symbol related to the status of women in some country and their gender role in their society and the habits of a religious community which are a voluntary choice detached from gender role and women in society. I think is 2 different subjects we talk here and might be a bit confusing and risky to put them in the same level of discussion. the level of discussion though is opened to both subjects..but, are they really related? I don't know. just putting out there the question. congratulations for the cartoon pal ;-)

12 Apr 2011

right !
good one !

12 Apr 2011

@Miguel, this cartoon is about religious expression, and how some party's use this as a reason for exclusion. As a strictly non-religious person I don't really like both "concepts", but freedom of expression and freedom of speech are very dear to me.

12 Apr 2011

Nice cartoon. I'm still stumped as to why there is so much support to ban the burqa, given that in Europe and America there is no law that forces women to wear them. Women who do so choose to do it. It's just a choice of clothing. Why are people so bent out of shape about it that they have to ban it? I simply don't understand it.

12 Apr 2011

Good one Jean! And to the point!

12 Apr 2011

Thanks Jean for your support

12 Apr 2011

isn't it a hiyab represented on the cartoon?pretty different connotacions than a burqa or a niqab?also the controversy about role representations in some arab countries and the voluntary belongging to a catholic religious community?that would give a lot to discuss setting delicately the meaning differences for not mixing concepts. I would be particularly interested about eastern points of view though :-)

12 Apr 2011

very clever comparison .. good work Jean !

12 Apr 2011

I shared it on my facebook page. Amazing, Jean.

12 Apr 2011

really fitting comparison..good one Jean!

12 Apr 2011

Scherp! (Pardon my Dutch, can't think of a good English equivalent)

12 Apr 2011

Leave a comment

Please Login to leave a comment