Nesrine Malik Sees Only Opportunism, Not The Burqa Wearing Elephant In The Room

The Guardian has marked the opening of the football season in sporting fashion with another open goal.

Bumbling Boris has shot his mouth off (and as ever his foot in its customary position in his mouth) about burqas.

Nesrine Malik says of it, ‘I have a very nuanced take on the whole thing that I have spent almost my entire adult life thinking about and living, but that I have no interest in expanding upon any more, because it is a futile pursuit. All the burqa now is code, a dogwhistle.’

Which translated from Guardianista bullshit means ‘as my career’s dependent on Uncle Tomming for white western pseudo leftie rags on the “different race, different culture” ticket I’m not going to make the mistake of Ratnering my marketplace!’

Of course, that Boris writes for the ‘Daily Dreadnought’ (the Daily Telegraph – the Guardian‘s archest of arch-enemies – not least of all because this most right wing of newspapers ironically has better left wing columnists and scoops than it) has nothing to do with it. Much.

All conveniently forgetting that she wrote for the same newspaper eight years ago, until they decided they wanted someone who could write better than puff pieces.

Here’s a reminder of how she felt about wearing a burqa during her early life in Saudi Arabia – one of the most backward of backward nations when it comes to women’s rights (allowing women to drive cars only this year and expected a round of applause for it):

‘At the age of 18, the thought of covering my body in a shapeless black gown and hiding my face so that only my eyes would show was inconceivable. It was humiliating, violating, dehumanising. Upon donning the headpiece, my body language immediately changed, becoming apologetic, withdrawn and subdued. Wearing it seemed to empower all the men around me and put me firmly in my place as inferior… Over the next three years, however, my opposition gradually eroded.’

Yes, but as any prison warden will tell you, eventually even the toughest prisoner submits – especially in Saudi Arabia. Remember ‘Death Of A Princess’. Bottom line is she’s an apologist for it.

Nesrine Malik has missed the elephant in the room regarding Boris Johnson’s ‘letterbox’ remarks about the burqa however (‘It’s no coincidence Boris Johnson has discovered strong views on the burqa’ – Guardian 6th August 2018) – and that’s the complete and utter lack of outrage to them.

Usually an event like this would at least have been marked by a Socialist Workers Party demo complete with obligatory petition, accompanying requests for donations ‘to build the campaign’ and placards being waved by shouty aggressive trust fund kids cosplaying the working classes.

Yet the silence from the usual suspects looking for the next Rivers of Blood drama is deafening, especially against one of their all-time favourite targets: posh boy Boris – the Conservative Party’s answer to Grawp from Harry Potter. Not even one ironic accusation of ‘opportunism’.

Perhaps it’s the TV success of ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ making many espy uncomfortable parallels within our own society.

Perhaps it’s the sustained spell of unbearable hot weather making many sympathise with the horrendous discomfort anyone would feel under such an unsuitable garment – least of all when most are heat soaking black (even the most diehard Goth swaps out their noir wardrobe in a heatwave). That the burqas wearer’s male counterparts are often to be found by their side (or a few steps ahead of them) in very un-Islamic long shorts and short sleeves only adds to the offence.

For ‘offence’ is the key here. Even the most dyed-in-the-wool male chauvinist pig has a line to cross – Harrow educated John McCririck may be king of the misogynists, but his battles against horse-racing’s treatment of women (especially by the Jockey Club) were for long a voice crying in the wilderness. Is it really any wonder half a century since feminism became mainstream that people of all politics, beliefs and genders find burqas offensive?

Christian and Jewish societies dropped expecting women from veiling themselves in public so they wouldn’t be considered prostitutes from the Enlightenment onwards (some like the Amish are still to catch up). In Islamic countries, practicality caused their generational decline until Iran’s 1979 Islamist revolution made burqas (and the so-called ‘more moderate’ abayas, hijabs and niqabs) ideological weapons against the inevitable crumbling of women’s second class status in society.

There’s a particular macabre irony in blanketing another human being to show their barefaced subjugation – and let’s be clear about this, this is exactly the intent. It’s about women ‘knowing their place’ in relation to men.

It’s beyond belief the same media hipsters hot under the collar about Christian ‘purity rings’ for girls (and rightly so) turn blind eyes to it. Last decade, Tasha Maltby was thrown off a bus and refused entry on another because her boyfriend had her on a dog lead: looking for sympathy (and compensation) for being ‘discriminated against’, they got very short shrift from the public and the media for the message their antics sent out.

For this reason, Johnson is correct lampooning what no gender equality based society should be expected to tolerate. Wrong messenger, almost the right message.