Good enough for Nobel, but not for Quebec

Sheema Khan in The Globe, mocking the paternalism of Les feministes laiques de Québec and the “Janettes” (Les femmes voilées sont «manipulées», dit Janette Bertrand):

Feminism, we thought, was about empowering women to make choices for themselves. Instead, la feminisme laïque is the new patriarchy, with its condescending, my-way-or-the-highway attitude. But Muslim women are fusing a new breed of feminism, where spirituality melds with activism to advance the cause of both genders. Their role model is Malala – not Miley or Marois. Spirituality is seen not as an enemy, but as an ally in providing the impetus to seek equal opportunities for women in education, health, wealth and political participation.

Good enough for Nobel, but not for Quebec – The Globe and Mail.

And from within Quebec, the inevitable lettre ouverte replying to the Janettes, from “Les inclusives“. While the gradual inclusive approach to integration makes sense, may not necessarily end up with fewer hijabs in the end; but as long as women are participating in wider society, whether wearing a hijab or not, it doesn’t really matter:

…l’intégration des musulmanes voilées doit se faire petit à petit, sans brusquer les choses. «Ça prend trois générations pour intégrer un immigrant. Nous, on le fait souvent en deux générations. Mais si on commence à les bousculer, ça ne fonctionnera pas», dit-elle.

«C’est la société québécoise dans son ensemble qui va changer les valeurs de ces femmes. Leurs enfants vont fréquenter les garderies. Elles vont aller sur le marché du travail. Et les voiles vont tomber, un à un».

Les «inclusives» répliquent aux Janettes