research - Associated Student Government, Northwestern University

RESEARCHthose who do not follow the rules of “living together.”“Volunteers, wearing a mask or a veil to hide back thenational society, rejecting the very spirit of the Republicis founded on the desire to live together.” 72 The Frenchgovernment wants “to convince women to give of themselvesto wear the full veil. However, we compel thosewho oblige them to accept the rules of coexistence andthe principles of living together.” 73Sub-Frame: Interaction NormsThe bill “aims to ban in public places, disguisingthe face to ensure the basic conditions of living togetherRepublican.” 74 A large component of what French societalharmony requires is, as the State Council put it, “aminimum set of requirements reciprocal and essentialguarantees of life in society.” 75 Interaction norms are asub-frame of “living together.” “Live together, it meansrefusing the withdrawal, refusing at the same time therejection of others... The will to live together implies theacceptance of the gaze of another, this means being ableto see that you are addressing.” 76 Being able to make eyecontact with another person is seen as fundamental inthe French mind. It is a way for people to connect andinteract.Offer everyone the opportunity to recognize the man orwoman with whom he exchanges, talks or contacts wasonce a social convenience tacitly admitted by all - in otherwords, an unwritten social contract that was not necessaryto formalize in a text. This social contract would be calledinto question, the public can still defend and guarantee, ina modern society, this minimum threshold below whichshared values of individuals within the same territoryceased to form a company? 77Some French politicians of the National Assemblywere very upset over the loss of human contact and societalnorms a veiled figure presented. “How not to feeluneasy about someone who says freely wear clothingthat conceals and insulates it entirely?... How could younot see a clear rejection of any form of civility?” 78 Onewent so far as to say, “Walking in public space coveredfrom head to toe, including face, is something so shockingas to walk naked!” 79Sub-Frame: RespectJean Glavany gives a moving speech on the NationalAssembly floor that shows how deeply implicated respectis with many other master frames and sub-frames.Wearing the full veil is also contrary to the principle ofbrotherhood. Madam Keeper, I readily acknowledge thatyou have rightly mentioned earlier the concept of livingtogether. It implies a respect for others requires that uncoverher face, because we’re not talking about any bodypart. Elisabeth Badinter said before the parliamentaryinformation mission, the face can see and be seen, which isthe basis of respect in a public dialogue and exchange. Thenotion of respect is essential in this debate. 80Respect is not limited to interactions between peoplebut is also connected to the broader idea of societalVOLUME 7, 2011-2012respect. President Chirac is quoted in the National Assemblydebate of July 6th, 2010: “Respect those who arrive,respect those who receive.” 81 The laws and customsof France are to be respected by those she takes in.Sub-Frame: Social/Public OrderClosely related and a sub-frame of “living together”is the idea of social or public order. Public order is discussedin more detail above. French society is seen asharmonious and ordered. “The veil… threatens publicorder. This reason alone can establish a prohibition ofany clothing hiding their faces. The first duty of legislatorsand mayors, is it necessary to point out, is to protectpublic order.” 82 The idea for the ban “is based on aconstitutional basis, the social order.” 83Public order is a clear legal basis which, in the intangibledimension that you mentioned, covers the minimum setof requirements for life in society. We agree with the referenceto the societal order. If, in 1789, this set of rules wasdefined by the concept of society, he took over the storythe meaning of ‘living together’ or, better yet, fraternity. Itis up to Parliament to define its contours. It is our responsibilityand we assume. 84It is up the French government to reconcile “theprinciple of public order and the right to respect forprivate life.” 85Sub-Frame: Immigrant Integration“Wearing the full veil is not a religious requirement,but the willingness of extremists to test the republic!” 86Many French politicians see the veil as a political, notreligious act. A generational gap exists between firstgeneration immigrants and, second and third generationimmigrants. The children of the first immigrantsuse radicalization of as ways to show their discontentwith their situation in France. “Certainly, our country isexperiencing difficulties with school, which reproducesinequalities; with a social elevator down, and with thepersistence of intolerable discrimination.” 87 The Frenchgovernment wants to forbid the veil so as to stop thisform of protest, even though it recognizes the motivationsof these immigrants. “Wearing the full veil is anexpression of a much broader phenomenon which findsits roots in the economic and social disintegration ofour society, particularly in disadvantaged neighborhoods,where the state is often absent today.” 88 The oppositionused the immigrant integration sub-frame astheir reasoning against the ban.It is obvious that the adoption of this text will be of littleeffect if we do not seek to address the roots of evil whichthe veil is merely a symptom. No person will never havethe slightest impact against the Republic’s abandonmentof some of our cities where they are mass unemployment,school failure and violence that make the bed of obscurantism.89Those for the ban wish to think that by preventingminorities from stepping out of the French mold, theywill be better integrated into French society.NORTHWESTERN UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL57