When, earlier this week, I saw the pictures of the first lady sitting on a pink couch bracketed by, well, you couldn’t quite tell what they were, because they’re wearing head-to-toe burqas, I thought she was making a powerful statement. Americans don’t force their women to wear those ridiculous outfits, and by all rights they shouldn’t be forced to do so just because they are visiting a Muslim country. We live in a free country–if Muslims (or anyone else trying to go incognito) want to wear those things over here, that’s their prerogative. By the same token, any American woman wishing to brazenly flash a little ankle is also free to do so. Most Americans traveling the Middle East have little recourse but to don the black sheets, but the first lady certainly does. She can dress as she likes. Which is why I find the image (at right) from Saudi Arabia so disturbing. The first lady represents the American people, she is not a private citizen, and she certainly isn’t acting as a private citizen in her tour of the Middle East. That she would oblige her hosts by wearing a shmata on her head is a tacit endorsement of Islam’s subjugation of women. Do I expect a visitor to a synagogue to wear a yarmulke? Yes, though I wouldn’t force them, and a yarmulke isn’t a sign of subordination to another group of people, but to God. And also, radical Jews didn’t attack this country, radical Saudi Muslims did. This isn’t merely a question of being a polite guest. And what will happen if Hillary wins the White House in 2008? Will she be expected to don the burqa on her trips to Saudi? One would hope not. Sitting presidents don’t take fashion commands from foreign dignitaries, and neither should first ladies. Where are the feminists when we actually need them? HT Hot Air, LGF
