Michelle Obama Headscarf Shock

In refusing to cover her head at a funeral Michele betrays a typical Western confusion of the religious with the cultural. A Muslim woman covers her head out of respect for God, not fear of the caliphate…

But refusing to wear a headscarf is like coming to a Royal funeral at Westminster Abbey, or an audience at the Vatican, and failing to wear a hat or a black mantilla. It’s the kind of gesture that is more likely to alienate good Muslims than bad Saudis.

Amy Davidson at the New Yorker reviews past form on this subject then looks at all from another angle:

But it’s worth imagining another scenario: suppose, for reasons independent of politics, that Michelle Obama liked the way a head scarf looked. Why shouldn’t she put one on? There are, naturally, some constraints on what any First Lady wears on public occasions; jeans and sneakers at the Inauguration would be strange. But if we, at some point in this century, have a First Lady, or President, who wears any sort of headgear, for reasons related to any number of faiths (theology and millinery have historically enjoyed close alliances), what, exactly, would be the problem with that?

It is right to be outraged at religious police chasing Saudi women and arresting them for supposedly immodest dress. It is also right to ask why French laws should prevent a woman in Paris from covering her face or a schoolgirl from wearing a head scarf.

ThinkProgress also looks at previous senior foreign women in Saudi Arabia and their dress choices. Good pictures.

But this Tweet by Telegraph correspondent Louisa Loveluck caught my eye:

It shows what? That modern diplomacy is still very much a man’s world? No, it doesn’t show that.

Her piece looked at the headscarf story through the angle of getting some quotes from some “Middle East-based female diplomats”:

“It’s much the same as when you’re at home,” says one western diplomat, based in Cairo. “You wouldn’t turn many heads if you turned into the foreign ministry wearing the same as you would to a London meeting.”

In most cases, the level of conservatism has more to do with task than location, and meetings with religious officials tend to require the most forethought.

“It’s just an easier exchange when you wear a long skirt and cover your arms,” says the diplomat. “It’s easier to build a rapport when your clothes aren’t confronting their prejudices head on.”

But the furore surrounding Mrs Obama’s bared follicles belies a broader truth – that female diplomatic officials and spouses face scrutiny the world over.

Several of those who spoke to the Telegraph said they have felt more pressure from senior officials within their own foreign service than from those they meet abroad – two said that had been told to opt for a more feminine yet conservative look.

“You have to look at what few women have become successful within the Foreign Office – inevitably they are very sharp-suited and conservatively dressed, and so you adopt that accordingly,” says one.

“That’s not pressure from conservative countries – that’s how a woman’s world works.”

Hmm. If you actually go into the FCO or any UK Embassy, you’ll see that even within the tightest definition of ‘conservatively dressed’ women’s clothes have a far wider choice of looks, styles, colours, fabrics and accessories than men’s. Men fumbling to get dressed in the morning are mainly left with a darkish suit and the baffling issue of the colour of their ties and cufflinks (if they are not wearing a cheap polyester shirt) and, maybe, some natty socks. So in this drab oppressive man’s world of diplomacy, women have a far better deal in this respect.

More importantly, it is hugely unlikely that any senior male UK diplomat is going to have a word with a more junior female colleague and ask her to dress in a ‘more feminine yet conservative way’. No simple working male diplomat needs the ensuing explosion in his life. If this has ever happened within the FCO, it surely will have been a desperate move by a senior official (male or female) to try to sort out the appearance of a woman who for some reason had dressed in a wildly inappropriate way for an occasion. If so, they were properly doing their job, not exerting pressure from THE PATRIARCHY in a MAN’s WORLD.

In other words, the M Obama headscarf media squawkings (Update: by men and women commentators alike) shed exactly zero light on modern diplomacy and the supposed male domination thereof. All it tells us is that – as we all know already – in Muslim-dominated countries there is a generally much stricter attitude to how women (and men) should dress/behave. See eg this typical ‘look’ for young women officials in Dubai.

Yes, in those Muslim societies the men utterly dominate and set the sartorial rules. Elsewhere? Not really. In Saudi Arabia itself male-dominated Muslim fanaticism sinks to the beyond disgusting point of dragging a woman out into the street and clumsily beheading her. The Saudi male blogger facing repeated lashings is getting far more international publicity than this horrendous episode.

Diplomacy dress codes are simple, and apply to men and women alike.

Dress for the occasion, whether you are male or female or some other modern category. You are representing your country. You need to be smart and comfortable while putting others at ease. If you are the guest in someone else’s house or country, show appropriate respect to their traditions but also for your own. Avoid embarrassing servility.

Oh, and don’t chew gum on high state occasions. Trivially naff.