The New York Times ran a piece yesterday on the (very profitable) business of hymen restoration in France, and today Slate picks up the subject as well. Both articles mention the case of the Muslim marriage that was annulled by a French court because the bride misrepresented herself as a virgin, but neither one mentions that the groom in the case is actually a French convert who was upset that his North African wife had lied to him about her past (in)experience. He asked for an annulment, and his legal case was based on the fact that she misrepresented herself, not on the substance of the misrepresentation. Naturally many Muslims and non-Muslims in France were upset with this ridiculous ruling because it leaves the door open for retrograde ways of handling the institution of marriage. These two points were not really made in the articles. It never ceases to amaze me how much importance is given in the Western press to what Muslim women wear on their heads, or what they have between their legs. I only wish that their education and their health warranted such attention.


Comments are closed.

  • Twitter

  • Category Archives

  • Monthly Archives