The pants or the niqab, the choice is yours - AgoraVox the citizen media

Listen

http://www.agoravox.tv/actualites/societe/article/la-police-humiliee-par-des-31308

If you allow your wives to break a law on the wearing of trousers, our women also have our blessing to break a law on the wearing of the burqa, the niqab and the veil. Basically, this is the message of the demonstration, undeclared and unauthorized. (it should be noted that the transgression with them is not limited to a precise point, but becomes a mode of expression to exist and their existence is conceived only against the other). It is surprising to see the deployment of so much energy, in a period of crisis, where there are so many problems (unemployment, public debt, Europe, etc.) for which it is more than desirable to mobilize one's time and efforts, some have fun burning the penal code. After the penal code, would we see the flag, (did you call me Islamophobic, that doesn't matter to me), blacklisted books, women, infidels...

What interests me (the criticism of these religious enthusiasts are made by others) in this story is its legal aspect.

1- The first aspect concerns the law of 26 Brumaire Year IX of the Republic: "Any woman wishing to dress as a man must report to the police headquarters to obtain authorization..."

This provision of the law concerns the cross-dressing of women. The woman takes on the identity of the other sex, she pretends to be a man. There were also those contesting the order of domination and the lack of freedom and discrimination. The context is in no way comparable. Here is an excerpt from the article written by Christine Bard (Clio, History, Women and Societies) “The oldest cross-dressing permission request in this file has been copied. It dates from September 17, 1806 and bears the number 167. It authorizes Miss Catherine-Marguerite Mayer to dress as a man to ride a horse. Another document – ​​the original this time – mentions the authorization n° 74 granted to Miss Adèle Sidonie Loüis, 36 years old, musical artist, residing in Asnières. She benefits from it for “cause of health” for six months from October 28, 1862.

4 The rest of the file is made up of press clippings. In 1889, La Petite République française evoked Dame Libert, who appeared before her judges. She runs a printing press in the Latin Quarter and has already drawn reprimands from the district police commissioner several times because of her masculine clothes. The court gives her a warning, asking her to return to the clothes of her sex. In vain, Dame Libert, in a confident voice, replies that she has no dress. A few cuts later, we find this printing “pattern”. Le Temps (February 9, 1889) reports that it was following a letter of denunciation that Dame Libert found herself at the police station, a letter which accused her of usurping the male identity for ten years. His confession sheds light on his journey. Coming from Strasbourg, after having left her husband for incompatibility of temper in 1878, she associated herself professionally with her lover. She explains to the police that "the men's suit allows women to engage in commercial work with more freedom" and assures that until then, no one had discovered "its false quality". The offender invokes her ignorance of the law and agrees to seek authorization. She will get it, according to another source.

5 Miss Foucaud also ended up obtaining the authorization. The daughter of a ruined industrialist, she arrived in Paris in 1830 where she worked as an extra in the theatre, a coachwoman for a countess, then a printing worker, at 2.5 F a day. When she discovered that in the men's workshop, where the same work was done, the pay was 4 F, she asked the boss to change workshops. The latter refused: “absolute impossibility. The sexes are not mixed”. She then asked her account, had her hair cut, dressed as a man and got hired a few days later in the men's workshop. Thanks to her savings, she was able to become the owner, in Clichy, of huts for the ragpickers. In this city, "for fifty years, in her male costume, she knew how to maintain order and discipline". Le Vieux Papier, which tells this story in 1911, reports the existence of other transvestites exercising male trades: the "printer" of Bd St-Michel, whom we already know, a former prostitute who entered a locksmith's workshop, a stonemason, a groom from around Paris, and a merchant of the four seasons in Paris, Célestine R..., known as "the bearded woman". According to the newspaper, “her situation gave rise to jeers, more or less pleasant, not only from her colleagues, the other merchants, but above all from the beardless male merchants and also from a certain public. On the other hand, she could not part with this beautiful ornament which, in truth, suited her very well. She sacrificed her graying hair and asked permission from the prefect of police on whom she depended as a licensed merchant and as a Parisian citizen, to wear the male costume.

How to Respond when You Are Diagnosed With Cancer http://t.co/aLc3e0aS

— Reliable opinion. Fri Feb 15 01:38:32 +0000 2013

It is easy to understand that women in this context sought to improve their condition.

We are far, in this kind of demonstration, from the bravery of Saudi women who transgress an iniquitous law and drive despite the ban. Nor, nothing to do with Afghan women who can risk their lives and their physical integrity at the slightest misconduct. These women claiming the burqa and the veil, put themselves forward for several reasons, and I have nothing to wax about their motivations. But it is obvious that their freedom to be what they are is only the means to kill the freedom of other women. This kind of demonstration is exemplary, where we see a guy haranguing the crowd. For example, the terms “sister” and “brother” denote close blood kinship. And that brings to mind both incest prohibitions and taboos. Through this terminological bias, instinctive adhesion is aroused without rationality or moderation. The circle around 'sisters' and the parody of men circling women to signify their protection from 'sexual' predators is very overt. In the second video, the woman who was checked and taken to the police station repeated it and insisted on the "sexual side" in the police, even the policewoman to impose the pat-down on her. And she insinuated that the police men were only looking for the pat-down in order to touch her... understand who can.

We see that conflict and provocation are more and more sought after and open not only to create buzz (we will have a very exciting soap opera this summer, we are on the third video) but also to play on the status of victims and resisters. Just look at the background music that accompanies the video (singing with a religious connotation, to arouse emotional excitement, like the drum and the bugle for war, and the Arabic formulas repeated at the 'envi..., it could have remained laughable if it didn't carry a certain danger).

For this preacher, this leader, I will teach him that the law can be abrogated in a tacit way.

His blow on "the prohibition to wear pants" is a pipe.

Let me explain, a law, special in this case, has not been expressly repealed . But it was because of subsequent laws, which are in contradiction with its provisions. And according to the case law, it is the recent law that applies . In our case, it is the laws on the individual freedom of women that give them the same equal status as men. Women now have the same freedoms as men, at least in the texts. Asking for the application of a law which dates back to 1800 which is in contradiction with those which followed it is strictly illegal. So it's not worth getting on these high horses to confuse our minds as is already the case with his excited reptilian bulb.

Then, the second aspect concerns the bans and desperate bluster to curb the fashion for the veil and the burqa. Shadow soldiers (some call themselves Pride Riders) work in the shadows or not in civil society that the state has abandoned to associations of all kinds for the sole purpose of saving money and enriching the fans. of the CAC40.

The veil is something special, it's like virginity, it's a feminine specificity. No one is going to check a man's virginity. There is no symmetry in this case. Politicians should have been wary of it. Excluding schoolgirls (it will come, don't worry, and you shouldn't say poor little girl, otherwise you will be treated as a feminist petty bourgeois, useful idiot of capitalism), middle school girls and high school girls does not solve the problem. And above all, we exclude girls and not boys. These are as religious as veiled girls. We don't check their virginity like we do for girls. A boy can always pass the religious prohibitions of fornication outside marriage, he does not undergo any chastity test.

When politicians have promulgated a law that is difficult to apply and only targets women, the most zealous and pro-veil (the symbol of the freedom of the pious Muslim woman, subject to her God and not to man or to the Republic, it must be underlined), these new zealots are at work to spread the good news, and all means are good for proselytes. They learn from advertising marketing. What is supposed (according to their claim) to be only the expression of a freedom becomes over time and demonstrations an obligation by mimicry and reaction of opportunist or imbecile followership. The choice of some becomes through harassment and repeated injunctions an obligation, unconscious or not, for many women. The final objective is to come to no longer consider themselves as a minority.