Photo of the Day: Faceless Time

From the Times' cover story, "Muslims’ Veils Test Limits of Britain’s Tolerance." A number of Muslim women donning the niqab — the full face covering, which Labor politician Jack Straw said out to be banned in Britain — are native-born to Britain. What probably won't receive the attention it deserves in that Times article is the following paragraph:

“For me it is not just a piece of clothing, it’s an act of faith, it’s solidarity,” said a 24-year-old program scheduler at a broadcasting company in London, who would allow only her last name, al-Shaikh, to be printed, saying she wanted to protect her privacy. “9/11 was a wake-up call for young Muslims,” she said.

Interesting that she should feel "solidarity" after 9/11, in'it? Solidarity with whom, dear?

I've never been one for mandating English language instruction in the U.S. or any other means of coerced assimilation. Frankly, I think if a naturalized citizen, or tenured immigrant, wishes to remain a social alien, he or she should be allowed to do so. If I ever moved to France or Russia, I should find it a matter of obligation and courtesy to acquire the language of my adopted country, and I would call anyone who didn't do likewise rude and solipsistic.

However, there is something inherently disturbing and menacing about a head-to-toe black cloth covering teachers, lawyers, IT programmers, etc. They look like ninjas. And they are capitulating to the more primeval tenets of Islam, which say that the feminine enticements of a woman's face are too powerful for men to overcome and therefore all women must go about their public lives in a state of purdah. Whither the cries of patriarchy and subjugation from feminists here? At least the glass ceiling was always see-through. (By the way, and since you asked, I would add that the aesthetic requirements of Orthodox women differ only in scale, not moral legitimacy.)

Modern society doesn't allow nudity on the streets for reasons of indecency and, one might argue, the hazards of distraction. A cracking bust can precipitate a 10 car pile-up; a particularly unfortunate ripple of "back fat" can call up an unsuspecting diner's expensive lunch; the pendulous swing of a middle-aged scrotum can't be good for anybody. Yet nudists are just as entitled to partake of their breezy moments of transcendence and "identification." They have colonies for that.

What happens when — and it's only a matter of time, statistically speaking — a niqab-wearing woman in London commits a crime for which she can't be identified as the perpetrator? You'll hear the multiculturalists rushing to her defense then as well, claiming that the real criminals are cultural imperialists who think the Sykes-Picot Agreement mooted the social contract.

Is the niqab antisocial? You bet. Is it possibly dangerous? Yes, it is that, too.