Education watchdog Ofsted accused of racism over hijabs

Education watchdog Ofsted accused of racism over hijabs April 2, 2018

The UK’s National Education Union has accused Amanda Spielman, above, head of Ofsted and the Chief Inspector of schools in England, of ‘naked racism and and Islamophobia’ because of her opposition to young Muslim girls wearing hijabs in primary schools.
The union’s Easter conference in Brighton, according to this Guardian report, unanimously backed a motion attacking official support for the ban.
The motion accused Spielman of going beyond her remit over her recent comments linking the wearing of the hijab to sexualisation of young girls and her call for “muscular liberalism” to promote British values in schools.
Latifa Abouchakra, a teacher from Ealing, told the conference that such language made Muslims an easy target, and was:

Just another term for racism and Islamophobia.

Abouchakra related how she had been called a “terrorist” while leading a secondary school class trip to Hampton Court.

Ofsted’s stance has other ramifications. It signals to the British public that women are oppressed by Islam, and emboldens groups such as EDL (English Defence League), BNP (British National Party) and other racist groups.

Last year, Spielman said Ofsted school inspectors could ask young girls why they wore the hijab, when wearing it “could be interpreted as sexualisation” of girls as young as four or five. Most Islamic teaching requires headdress for girls only at the onset of puberty.
Mehreen Begg, a teacher from Croydon, said Ofsted’s position was:

Unwarranted and draconian. It is wholly inappropriate for Ofsted inspectors to question primary-age Muslim girls on their choice of dress. This is an act of intimidation by a powerful adult on a young child and has no place in our education system.

Pete Smith, a delegate from Swindon, accused Ofsted of aiding a hostile climate for Muslims, calling its policy on hijabs as:

Racism dressed up as liberalism. Let’s tell Ofsted, let’s tell the D f E 9Department for Education), that we are not prepared to stand up for their racism. We will face them down, we will push that racism back by any means necessary.

After the motion was passed on Sunday morning, the NEU section president, Kiri Tunks, said:

It sends a really important message to the Muslim community that we will stand with you against these attacks.

A spokesperson for the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) said it welcomed the union’s efforts:

It appears that Ofsted is becoming increasingly isolated in its ‘muscular liberalism’ approach on imposing clothing restrictions for young Muslim girls.

The controversy grew earlier this year when Spielman publicly supported an effort by the leadership of St Stephen’s primary school in Newham to stop young girls wearing the hijab at school. The school’s head dropped the ban after an outcry.
When the motion was first announced, a spokesperson for Ofsted said:

There’s nothing political about ensuring that schools and parents aren’t being subject to undue pressure by national or community campaign groups.
Headteachers need to be able to take uniform decisions on the basis of safeguarding or community cohesion concerns, and Ofsted will always support them in doing that.

Meanwhile it was reported here that, at the weekend, the Norwegian government proposed a nationwide ban on the wearing of full-face veils, such as the burqa and the niqab, in universities, schools, and kindergartens.

France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Bulgaria and the German state of Bavaria have all imposed restrictions on wearing full-face veils in public places.
If passed by parliament, Norway could become the first Nordic country to introduce such ban in the education sector, Finance Minister Siv Jensen said in a statement. Denmark plans to fine people who cover their face in public.
Jensen, who is also the leader of the anti-immigrant right-wing Progress Party, said the ban would send a strong signal that Norway is:

An open society where we are going to see the face of each other.

The government amended an initial proposal, first presented in June, to allow the wearing of full-face veils during breaks and staff meetings in schools and universities, but it would have to apply throughout working hours at kindergartens.

Jan Tore Sanner, above, Minister of Knowledge and Integration said in the statement:

A ban on face-covering garments will ensure open communication with children, students and newly arrived immigrants in educational situations.

Sanner belongs to the centre-right Conservatives.
Under the Norwegian proposal, employees who broke the rule several times would risk losing their jobs, and students would face expulsion, the government said. The ban would not apply to headgear like the hijab or hats.

Local bans on wearing burqa and niqab have been already introduced in some upper secondary schools in Norway.
Norway’s minority government, a coalition of the Conservatives, the Progress Party and the centrist Liberals, said in June it was confident it would find enough support for the move in parliament. If it does, the ban would start in August.
Separately, Oslo police said in a report that the capital had seen the highest reported number of hate crimes last year, with 198 incidents considered, against 175 in 2016.

The biggest increase we see among are women insulted in the category of religion, and more specifically Islam.

"Hmmmm, more prayers. That aught to do it. Those clergy are sure to stop diddling ..."

Satan blamed for misnaming Mormons – ..."
"So, basically, the people complaining about the ad are admitting that they are bigots/racists/homophobes/etc., and ..."

Scottish anti-hate campaign slammed for ‘fanning ..."
"A study on 20 people only? It looks limited, no?"

Study finds that bizarre Jewish ritual ..."
"I wonder if the Scottish government's anti-hate campaign includes hatred coming from Islam? Or do ..."

Scottish anti-hate campaign slammed for ‘fanning ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • AgentCormac

    Jesus H stop-dancing christ, I can feel my blood pressure starting to go through the roof here.
    ‘Ofsted’s stance… signals to the British public that women are oppressed by Islam’. If someone could please demonstrate to me how women aren’t oppressed by Islam I’ll gladly wear a fucking hijab myself.
    ‘It is wholly inappropriate for Ofsted inspectors to question primary-age Muslim girls on their choice of dress. This is an act of intimidation by a powerful adult on a young child and has no place in our education system.’ No. It is wholly inappropriate for those whose minds have been rotted by religion to force primary-age girls of muslim parents to have no choice whatsoever about what clothes they wear. To act otherwise would constitute an act of intimidation by a powerful institution against a vulnerable child.
    ‘It appears that Ofsted is becoming increasingly isolated in its ‘muscular liberalism’ approach on imposing clothing restrictions for young Muslim girls.’ Actually, Ofsted isn’t imposing clothing restrictions on anyone. Quite the opposite. It’s giving young, oppressed women the chance to think for themselves and make decisions for themselves. Something which the leaders of every major religion in the world go out of their way to deny them.
    No religion should have the right to indoctrinate children. No child should be denied the opportunity to decide for his or her self.

  • Angela_K

    Teachers are paid to teach, not to engage in virtue-signalling politicking. Don’t these supposedly highly educated people see that the wearing of religious garb is like wearing gang colours and smacks of tribalism; and they must realise that primary school girls are being softened up for a life of subjugation by wearing the hijab.

  • 1859

    ‘Just another term for racism and islamophobia’ – What crap!! Whenever ANYTHING criticises ANY aspect of islam it is called racism and islamophobia. To hell with the values of the society that has welcomed Muslims into its schools etc. Ofsted is quite right to question this practice of dressing primary school girls in a religious costume which treats them as objects that need to hide their sexuality. It IS a form of indoctrination and it IS against the liberal values of our society.
    ‘Ofsted’s stance signals to the British public that women are oppressed by Islam ‘ But in a liberal society this IS correct – forcing women to wear such dress from the moment they enter primary school, gives them almost zero chance of ever thinking beyond the restraints of their religion – it therefore is quite definately a form of passive indoctrination and should be banned – as it seems to be in most Scandinavian countries.

  • 1859

    ‘Just another term for racism and islamophobia’ – What crap!! Whenever ANYTHING criticises ANY aspect of islam it is called racism and islamophobia. To hell with the values of the society that has welcomed Muslims into its schools etc. Ofsted is quite right to question this practice of dressing primary school girls in a religious costume which treats them as objects that need to hide their sexuality. It IS a form of indoctrination and it IS against the liberal values of our society.
    ‘Ofsted’s stance signals to the British public that women are oppressed by Islam ‘ But in a liberal society this IS correct – forcing women to wear such dress from the moment they enter primary school, gives them almost zero chance of ever thinking beyond the restraints of their religion – it therefore is quite definately a form of passive indoctrination and should be banned – as it seems to be in most Scandinavian countries where decent common sense seems to work well.

  • 1859

    Apologies for double posting – modem problems.

  • L.Long

    So long as the girls faces are exposed for ID purposes the type of close should be of no concern for the school. Parents are allowed to be aholes as long as no physical harm is done. Tirls will be shown the alternative to the mini-tent by the other girls.
    And yes the special clothes dictated by ahole religions are gang colors.
    So AgentC “No religion should have the right to indoctrinate children. No child should be denied the opportunity to decide for his or her self.” It is not really the religion as parents have the ability to say NO to religious BS. And parents have been brainwashing kids from day 1, just like your parents brainwashed you…why else would you feel better NOT being nude?

  • Gaurav Tyagi

    Bloody Muslim Morons, followers of the medieval cult formed by the Paedophile Mo-ham-head, who used to thigh his 6 year old child bride and Muslim idiots consider it as his act of kindness towards the child. Pisslam is a virus.

  • Michael Glass

    Covering the hair is one thing, but covering the whole face goes too far.

  • Jim Baerg

    When there is some sort of fairly rigid law or custom that this is men’s clothing & that is women’s clothing, more often than not the women’s clothing is more restrictive of movement etc. & is both a symbol & instrument of female oppression. The Burka is just the most extreme example of this that I am aware of.
    I will add that the restriction of movement makes it harder for a women to fight off or run away from an attacker, & makes it harder for her to get the exercise that would give her the strength & speed to have a chance of doing so. Burkas etc are rape enablers. I suspect this is the whole point of modesty culture.

  • Broga

    Jim Baerg: “more often than not the women’s clothing is more restrictive of movement etc.”
    This was a problem the suffragettes had pre WW1. The ruling men needed to catch and imprison them and torture them in prison. The king said he would like to shave their heads and sentence them to hard labour.
    The descriptions of force feeding in prison still shock when read today. Asquith, the PM, returning from a fortnight with his mistress in Greece was met by suffragettes and wrote,”Violet had the satisfaction of crunching the fingers of one of the hussies.”
    Clothing has been important in the control of women. The above is well described and documented in “Margot at War” by Anne de Courcy.

  • Brian Jordan

    One would have hoped that the nation’s teachers were themselves educated sufficiently to understand that Islam is not a “race”. Not so, it seems, alas.
    One would have wished that fewer of them had drunk of the well of leftist nonsense. Wished in vain, I fear – some have been imbibing for decades.

  • StephenJP

    I would agree that Ofsted should not be questioning the (primary-school) pupils about their headwear. But they should certainly give the school a hard time, and should not accept “parent pressure” as an excuse.
    Spielman is turning out to be quite a good Head of Ofsted. I trust she will stand firm and continue to get the backing of Ministers.

  • barriejohn

    The following article has been posted today:
    http://www.news24xx.com/read/news/5737/Nine-activities-forbid-by-Islam-over-unlawful-relationships-between-men-and-women
    Such “liberation”. Priceless!

  • gedediah

    Banning stuff the name of liberty is bound to backfire. Schools should be free to agree dress codes that let everyone feel included and respected.

  • Gaurav Tyagi

    The Muslims always like to use PBUH (Peace be upon him) for their so called messenger of Allah. Actually this so called Allah was nothing but the alter-ego of Pisslam’s founder, Mo-ham-head. My version of PBUH is pee and poo be upon him.