Tristane Banon is a novelist and essayist. Latest book published:
La paix des sexes
(Éditions de L'Observatoire, 2021).
Initially, it is a stunt of dubious taste.
The identity feminist group "Némésis", a far-right "feminist" collective, decides to infiltrate in full veil and provocative placards at the demonstration, also called "feminist", organized by the "NousToutes" collective, "feminist" too.
So many different feminisms.
So few real feminisms… All of this takes place on Saturday, November 19, in Paris, Place de la République.
The first, the "Nemesis", think of immigration as the source of all women's ills and would welcome the banning of the veil in public space - which is a contradiction in terms in a free country, in addition to being a folly whose consequences we could measure when, in Iran, in the 1970s, the veil was then prohibited by the Shah.
if
followed by the Iranian Revolution and the Islamic regime still in place, which the Iranians want to get rid of, by demonstrating every day at the risk of their lives.
Excess leads to excess.
After the ban on the veil, the veil is compulsory.
We have never seen, in the entire history of the societies of the world, that suppressing freedoms led to the balance of peoples.
Dictatorships are bad advisers.
The “Nemesis”, whose ideas collect the assent of those who have abandoned all nuance, thus wanting to demonstrate a leftist “cultural relativism” incompatible with the display of feminist convictions, and anxious to denounce an overly ambiguous position of the collective “ UsAll”, held up signs
which the Iranians want to get rid of, by demonstrating every day at the risk of their lives.
Excess leads to excess.
After the ban on the veil, the veil is compulsory.
We have never seen, in the entire history of the societies of the world, that suppressing freedoms led to the balance of peoples.
Dictatorships are bad advisers.
The “Nemesis”, whose ideas collect the assent of those who have abandoned all nuance, thus wanting to demonstrate a leftist “cultural relativism” incompatible with the display of feminist convictions, and anxious to denounce an overly ambiguous position of the collective “ UsAll”, held up signs
which the Iranians want to get rid of, by demonstrating every day at the risk of their lives.
Excess leads to excess.
After the ban on the veil, the veil is compulsory.
We have never seen, in the entire history of the societies of the world, that suppressing freedoms led to the balance of peoples.
Dictatorships are bad advisers.
The “Nemesis”, whose ideas collect the assent of those who have abandoned all nuance, thus wanting to demonstrate a leftist “cultural relativism” incompatible with the display of feminist convictions, and anxious to denounce an overly ambiguous position of the collective “ UsAll”, held up signs
history of the societies of the world, that suppressing freedoms led to the balance of peoples.
Dictatorships are bad advisers.
The “Nemesis”, whose ideas collect the assent of those who have abandoned all nuance, thus wanting to demonstrate a leftist “cultural relativism” incompatible with the display of feminist convictions, and anxious to denounce an overly ambiguous position of the collective “ UsAll”, held up signs
history of the societies of the world, that suppressing freedoms led to the balance of peoples.
Dictatorships are bad advisers.
The “Nemesis”, whose ideas collect the assent of those who have abandoned all nuance, thus wanting to demonstrate a leftist “cultural relativism” incompatible with the display of feminist convictions, and anxious to denounce an overly ambiguous position of the collective “ UsAll”, held up signs
“My Koran, My Laws”
,
“My Hijab, My Freedom”
or even
“Islamist Feminist”
.
They do it in niqabs and burqas, covered from head to toe, in the middle of a crowd that doesn't seem to bother that much.
For nearly twenty minutes, the time to take photos, videos, and to see that their presence did not bother them, the young
femino-rightists
succeeded in demonstrating that, contrary to a previous demonstration of "We All" where they had been asked to leave the manu militari procession (with anti-migrant slogans under their arms), Islamist slogans posed no problem.
Read alsoFatiha Boudjahlat: “The veil, even chosen freely, remains a tool of segregation”
Should we refrain from drawing the necessary conclusions on the pretext that we are not on the far right?
I do not think so.
What this sequence demonstrates is the trap of extremes, on the right and on the left, proof that feminism cannot flourish if the alternative offered to it is only between xenophobia and intersectionality.
How to consent to intersectionality –
ie
, the “convergence of struggles” which, between the defense of women's rights and “respect”, under the guise of inclusion, of draconian practices, now arbitrates in favor of the latter?
How to accept in its ranks, demands as contradictory as "Islamist feminist" or even the theological-political oxymoron: "My Koran, My laws"?
At what point does the respect we owe to each other's practices become a respect for fundamentalism?
Can we call ourselves a feminist when, between the cause of women and those of religions, the second becomes a priority?
Tristane Banon
Where did left-wing feminism go wrong for not going immediately to meet these fully veiled women (which has been prohibited in France since October 11, 2010), and kindly enjoining them to go and be seen hiding elsewhere? ?
How could the feminists of the “NousToutes” collective abandon the defense of gender equality to the point of validating the most improbable cultural relativism?
When does the respect we owe to each other's practices become a respect for fundamentalism and its medieval injunctions?
Can one call oneself a feminist when, when choosing between the cause of women and those of religions, it is the second that takes priority?
How did intersectional feminism become so caricatural that it doesn't
can't defend himself against his own caricature?
Even, to distinguish themselves from it?
Is the defense of women drowned in the respect of a culture?
These are the questions you should ask yourself when you see this happening from a little distance.
Obviously, the “NousToutes” collective reacted.
Only, what about a
thread
on Twitter, which aims (after the fact) to denounce the
"trap"
(what had to be done) but which, putting the worst and the best of reactions in the same basket, gives the argument that
“These images were immediately shared and relayed by identity and far-right networks in order to create confusion and convey their Islamophobic ideology”
?
But who is confusing?
The far-right identity feminist who disguises herself as a potato sack, or the far-left intersectional feminist, whose overwhelming convictions prevent her from denouncing such a masquerade?
Instead of expressing its solidarity with those who are dying of removing their hijab, "WeAll" insisted on reaffirming:
"'Nemesis' has never had and will never have its place in our struggles"
.
Why did they refrain, at the time, from letting them know?
Tristane Banon
We would have liked an answer on the substance, and not on the form.
We would have liked to hear them say that such a farce is the antithesis of what they are fighting.
Because the only far-right identities did not relay these shocking photos and videos.
Those who, in France, value both respect for beliefs, respect for laws, respect for women and respect for universalist feminist thought, those, too, have relayed these images.
We would have liked the collective "NousToutes" to recall, on this occasion, and to rejoice, that the full veil is prohibited in France.
We would have liked him to recall, on behalf of women, that the veil, worn voluntarily or not, will always be a sexist marker.
We would have liked "NousToutes" to reaffirm that,
Read alsoHélé Béji: “Is the veil archaic or postmodern?”
We would also have liked that, finally reading (we can always dream!) Charb's so accurate text (
Open letter to the swindlers of Islamophobia who play into the hands of the racists
), "NousToutes" publicly twists its neck to this term of “Islamophobia” which, indexing racism (which is illegal) on the criticism of a religion (which is salutary), neutralizes the criticism of the sexism of the bigots.
We would have liked “WeAll” to take advantage of this bad taste happening to express their full and complete solidarity with those who, in Iran, are dying of removing their hijab.
We would have liked them to say that comparing the veil in France and the veil in Iran is not comparing different veils, it is comparing different political regimes.
We would have liked them to reaffirm the obvious: the meaning of the veil has no border and, from one country to another, in all latitudes, it symbolizes the debasement of women.
We would even have liked them to think so.
We would have liked a word of support from the hijabeuses who find their freedom in football in full dress.
We would have liked the video of a Muslim woman who removes her hijab in solidarity with Iranian women to become as viral as the video of an actress who cuts a lock of hair… We would have liked so many things.
Instead, the “NousToutes” collective wanted to reaffirm, in case there was any doubt:
““Némésis” has never had and will never have its place in our struggles”
.
Not his place, not his place… That is quickly said.
Because then why did they refrain, at the time, from letting them know?
