The Significant Handshake - France on Citizenship

[Fragile Bird]

An Algerian woman married a Frenchman and moved to France. After five years, she applied for citizenship. After passing all the tests, she went to the citizenship ceremony where she refused to shake the hand of the official handing out her citizenship, on religious grounds. He refused to grant the citizenship to her. A government tribunal said her action showed she was had not assimilated into French society. She took it to court. The appeal tribunal has now upheld the refusal of citizenship.

They are NOT saying she can't practice her religion, they are NOT telling her to leave. They are saying she shouldn't be a French citizen because equality of men and women is a core belief of French society.

Thoughts?

I am posting two articles, one brief one from the BBC reporting the facts, and a slightly more detailed NYT article which you might not be able to read because of the paywall.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43839655

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/21/world/europe/handshake-citizenship-france.html

Quote

PARIS — An Algerian woman’s refusal to shake hands with male officials at a French naturalization ceremony is sufficient grounds for denying her citizenship, France’s top administrative court has ruled.

In its decision — issued on April 11 but reported only this week — the court, known as the Council of State, said that the woman’s refusal “in a place and at a moment that are symbolic, reveals a lack of assimilation.”

 

 

[Altherion]

It looks like a pretty clear-cut case to me: the law explicitly specifies that people who want to be citizens have to assimilate. I lived in France for quite a few years and they are reasonably accommodating to visitors, but you can't expect them to fulfill your requests without at least trying to respect their customs.

[The Mance]

17 minutes ago, Altherion said:

It looks like a pretty clear-cut case to me: the law explicitly specifies that people who want to be citizens have to assimilate.

Right?  Surely this woman is familiar with the clearly stated and explicitly specific list of French customs one must adopt to properly denote assimilation.  

[Altherion]

While there are undoubtedly many obscure customs in any culture, if you can't figure out the significance of shaking hands, there isn't much hope for you...

[Yukle]

3 hours ago, Altherion said:

It looks like a pretty clear-cut case to me: the law explicitly specifies that people who want to be citizens have to assimilate. I lived in France for quite a few years and they are reasonably accommodating to visitors, but you can't expect them to fulfill your requests without at least trying to respect their customs.

Hmmm... because every single French person has exactly the same culture and expectations?

I'd have more sympathy for France's stance if it wasn't for the fact that they suppress Basque and Corsican culture, in the hopes that all talks of secession will die out in those areas. Assimilation only applies if you are a very specific type of French person, and it seems the areas of their old conquests are not allowed to assert themselves.

Assimilation is a two-way process. It doesn't not mean that you toss aside your culture and act like the majority. It means making a seamless blend with your community and other communities.

Seriously, France spent centuries bordering the Iberian peninsula while it was part of the various Muslim empires. My guess is the Algerian woman is Islamic, and if that's the case France is being obtuse not to admit that Muslims have been living - and assimilated within - France for more than 1,000 years.

France is literally named after the Franks, a German ethnic group. How's that for assimilation?

[kairparavel]

Are they revoking the citizenship of all the people who don't shake hands? 

[Yukle]

17 minutes ago, kairparavel said:

Are they revoking the citizenship of all the people who don't shake hands? 

If a French citizen refused to shake Macron's hand because they disagreed with his failure to be a neo-Nazi like that complete monster he defeated, they'd be praised to the hilt for their conviction and insistence on free speech.

[TrueMetis]

Holy shit these people are making a big deal out of a handshake, the Swiss story in particular. Like what happens if someone just doesn't want to shake your hand? "The regional authority said teachers "had the right" to demand handshakes." Like wtf? Since when do people have the right to touch another person?

[Yukle]

1 hour ago, TrueMetis said:

Holy shit these people are making a big deal out of a handshake, the Swiss story in particular. Like what happens if someone just doesn't want to shake your hand? "The regional authority said teachers "had the right" to demand handshakes." Like wtf? Since when do people have the right to touch another person?

I agree. This is nothing to do with France's culture and everything to do with racism. If, as is perfectly plausible, she didn't want to touch due to OCD or autism, I know that wouldn't bother them. It's a message sent from their powerful that Muslims aren't welcome, no matter how long they've been in France.

[Erik of Hazelfield]

This has been a hot topic here in Sweden as well. One politician was forced to resign because he refused to shake hands with women, and one teacher was fired because she refused to shake hands with men. 

I’m not so sure what to think. On one hand it’s clearly motivated by at least some amount of xenophobia. As you say, other excuses for not shaking hands would probably go down just fine. On the other hand, you have to conform at least to some degree to the culture you live in and the line has to be drawn somewhere.

The usual case for this isn’t citizenship but jobs. How much can I expect an employer to make exceptions to allow for my religious practices (like daily praying, wearing a turban etc)? The answer for me is pretty clear: you can deny someone a job when he or she refuses to do certain parts of the job or their religious practices get seriously in the way of performing their job. One example is the midwife who was denied an employment because she refused to take part in abortions. On the other hand, I do think it’s reasonable that employers must allow for prayer breaks given that the job isn’t time-critical (like, I don’t know, some guard duty?) and that the number of worked hours is the same. Otherwise it becomes too easy to justify firings on religious or cultural grounds on practical pretexts (in this company we eat pork on Thursdays! Otherwise you can’t work here!).

I think handshakes fall somewhere in between those cases though. I can absolutely see how for instance customers could react badly to someone who refuses handshakes - especially if they only do it to one sex only. Apart from that, I personally think it’s a dubious practice. Surely no religion is that puritanical? I get that French-style cheek kisses are awkward for a lot of people, and I fully understand if people feel uncomfortable with our Swedish practice of hugging everyone all the time, but if a handshake is too intimate for you... maybe it’s time to loosen up a little?

[Fragile Bird]

Why in heaven's name would a midwife be asked to participate in an abortion? Their specific role is to help in childbirth. What role would they play in an abortion???

[Ormond]

17 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Why in heaven's name would a midwife be asked to participate in an abortion? Their specific role is to help in childbirth. What role would they play in an abortion???

Historically midwives were quite often abortion providers.

http://www.birthtakesavillage.com/abortion-history-and-midwifery/

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/559a971ee4b02838d134f030/t/5625a1ace4b0be0be096a3c3/1445306796946/SQUAT2eng.pdf

And Erik may be thinking about this specific case from Scotland:

https://www.nursingtimes.net/roles/nurse-managers/midwives-lose-abortion-argument/5042145.article

or this one from Sweden:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39587154

 

[Rippounet]

17 hours ago, Yukle said:

I agree. This is nothing to do with France's culture and everything to do with racism. 

As a matter of fact, in French culture handshakes between men and women are reserved for formal occasions. Otherwise you're supposed to kiss or be kissed on the cheek (four times in my region) even when meeting strangers.  Obviously a female refusing a mere handshake on cultural or religious grounds cannot conform to French tradition and has not successfully integrated. 

Of course it will mainly affect Muslims... but the legal decision itself is perfectly valid and I fully support it. Whatever you think of the consequences this woman could not legitimately claim she was assimilated. 

[Erik of Hazelfield]

I was referring to the Swedish case. I guess the midwife job description in Swedish public hospitals might be a bit broader than elsewhere, including many tasks related to sexual and reproductive health, like contraception, STD testing, infertility and so on. Abortions are part of it. I’m not sure exactly which role they play there - I think at least later stage abortions are performed by surgeons - but they do handle early stage abortions where only abortive pills are used. 

It should be noted that the title of midwife is considered a master’s degree in Sweden and they have studied for at least 5.5 years including practice.

[Yukle]

18 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

As a matter of fact, in French culture handshakes between men and women are reserved for formal occasions. Otherwise you're supposed to kiss or be kissed on the cheek (four times in my region) even when meeting strangers.  Obviously a female refusing a mere handshake on cultural or religious grounds cannot conform to French tradition and has not successfully integrated. 

Of course it will mainly affect Muslims... but the legal decision itself is perfectly valid and I fully support it. Whatever you think of the consequences this woman could not legitimately claim she was assimilated. 

Except Muslims are nothing new in France, so what has the country been doing for the past 1,000 years if it has only just noticed this now?

And what would happen if she didn't shake hands, not for religious reasons, but because of a mental health issue that made her fear it, which is common in some people with autism? Would that mean that autistic people aren't assimilated in France?

What if it had been because on that particular day she had the flu and didn't want to spread it, and just said, "Sorry, I have a cold."? Would that also have been a valid reason for refusal?

What if she had a child who was getting a bit restless, and ran up to her during the ceremony, wanted to be picked up, and she didn't have a free hand?

What it she was a war veteran whose hands had been amputated after taking an injury, and she literally had no hands to shake?

What if she'd been a labourer who broke their hands at work and was now in a cast and couldn't easily shake hands?

What if she had carpal tunnel syndrome, or RSI, and shaking hands was extremely painful, and she sheepishly admitted as much, saying that she hadn't had surgery yet, but was looking forward to it?

What if - and I think this is completely valid - she just didn't want to?

See, I call bullshit on this idea that she failed to assimilate. I can think of huge cross-sections of the French populace at large who would have a valid reason not to shake hands, for one reason or another.

As for the legality of the decision, I wonder, what legal right was the government employee exercising when he didn't grant her citizenship based on that? Was it a power vested in him, with the expectation that he had discretion to exercise it?

Also, as a final point: if men and women are equal in France, why do we see stories like this in our news? It seems standing up for women is extremely selective in France.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-24/in-france-breasts-are-for-your-husband-breastfeeding/9463918

(The key sentences: Even though France has had a law on the books since 1917 that requires employers to set aside an hour a day for working mothers to nurse, the provision is neither sufficient nor widely enforced, according to breastfeeding advocates.)

[Fragile Bird]

I don't think midwives have as wide a role in Canada. I need to check that out with a friend in the medical field.

I started this thread to see how people would react to the story. At first I was somewhat surprised, but the more I read about it the more I thought it was a reasonable decision.

If equality is at the core of your society and the sexes are not equal in terms of who you can or cannot touch I'd have to agree that you are not fully assimilated. Since I think there are likely tens of thousands of Muslims who have acquired French citizenship and who I assume managed the handshake. I am also assuming that the 'assimilation' test is fairly recent, isn't it? In the past decade or so? I remember reading some years ago that various European countries started adding discussions about what their societies expected of citizens, including things like women wearing bathing suits at the beach and freedom of speech, even if that speech was insulting to some parts of society.

[Rippounet]

4 minutes ago, Yukle said:

See, I call bullshit on this idea that she failed to assimilate.

With all due respect, this is not up for debate.

The woman specifically said she was refusing the handshake on religious grounds ; there's no "what ifs" here. Her religion clearly prevents her full assimilation, because physical contact between men and women is part of French culture. 

There are many things to be debated here, but her failure to assimilate is not one of them. 

The larger question is whether it's a good thing that a Western country suddenly decides immigrants need to fully conform to its traditions to be granted citizenship, or that conforming to certain traditions is mandatory.

But that's like questioning the relevance of citizenship tests and requirements to begin with. If a country may choose mandatory requirements to grant citizenship then a handshake may be a valid test indeed. 

I was originally pointing out that such a test actually does make sense in a French context, funnily enough. 

[Fragile Bird]

8 minutes ago, Yukle said:

Except Muslims are nothing new in France, so what has the country been doing for the past 1,000 years if it has only just noticed this now?

And what would happen if she didn't shake hands, not for religious reasons, but because of a mental health issue that made her fear it, which is common in some people with autism? Would that mean that autistic people aren't assimilated in France?

What if it had been because on that particular day she had the flu and didn't want to spread it, and just said, "Sorry, I have a cold."? Would that also have been a valid reason for refusal?

What if she had a child who was getting a bit restless, and ran up to her during the ceremony, wanted to be picked up, and she didn't have a free hand?

What it she was a war veteran whose hands had been amputated after taking an injury, and she literally had no hands to shake?

What if she'd been a labourer who broke their hands at work and was now in a cast and couldn't easily shake hands?

What if she had carpal tunnel syndrome, or RSI, and shaking hands was extremely painful, and she sheepishly admitted as much, saying that she hadn't had surgery yet, but was looking forward to it?

What if - and I think this is completely valid - she just didn't want to?

See, I call bullshit on this idea that she failed to assimilate. I can think of huge cross-sections of the French populace at large who would have a valid reason not to shake hands, for one reason or another.

As for the legality of the decision, I wonder, what legal right was the government employee exercising when he didn't grant her citizenship based on that? Was it a power vested in him, with the expectation that he had discretion to exercise it?

Also, as a final point: if men and women are equal in France, why do we see stories like this in our news? It seems standing up for women is extremely selective in France.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-24/in-france-breasts-are-for-your-husband-breastfeeding/9463918

(The key sentences: Even though France has had a law on the books since 1917 that requires employers to set aside an hour a day for working mothers to nurse, the provision is neither sufficient nor widely enforced, according to breastfeeding advocates.)

Well, many of your examples are exaggerated, aren't they?

First of all, many of the Muslims who came to France were granted French citizenship as Algerian refugees, weren't they? And doesn't France have citizenship based on being born in France? I would think that takes up the vast majority of the Muslim population that have citizenship.

And I may be completely wrong here, but most countries don't grant citizenship to sick or disabled people. That comes under 'being a burden to society'. Do you know if France has that rule? Would an autistic person in fact qualify for citizenship? They might be granted residency, but not citizenship.

Citizenship ceremonies are presided over by a citizenship judge here in Canada, I assume a similar official presides over the ceremony in France, with the power to reject an applicant being vested in them. It's an administrative power, and the appeals went through administrative tribunal appeals.

Even a person with carpal tunnel syndrome would likely offer their hand symbolically and the official would be told to be gentle, don't you think? And if it was that bad, a doctor's certificate could be proffered? But if it was that bad, they may never have gotten that far. A French person perhaps knows the rules.

I see 4,000 applicants were denied citizenship in Australia, mainly because either they couldn't prove who they were or because of a criminal record of some kind. But also there's a 120,000 person backlog of applicants. I guess that's another way to get around handing out citizenship, no?

[Yukle]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

With all due respect, this is not up for debate.

The woman specifically said she was refusing the handshake on religious grounds ; there's no "what ifs" here. Her religion clearly prevents her full assimilation, because physical contact between men and women is part of French culture. 

I understand that, I meant that this is absolutely not the first time it has happened. There are all sorts of reasons, it's just that in this particular case the presiding officer decided to make a point. There would even have been times where he forgot to offer a handshake, and nothing would've happened, no one would have cared.

The point was to say that if she wasn't a Muslim, it might not have even occurred to the presiding officer to deny it. There's no doubt that her religion was a factor in his decision, possibly the only factor beyond her refusal itself.

And there's also the inherent flaw in the assumption that equality means conformity. What if you simply don't want to? Why do you even need another reason? It's ridiculous to assume that every French person wants physical contact with strangers. Most do, I assume, but all? That's not going to happen.

1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said:

First of all, many of the Muslims who came to France were granted French citizenship as Algerian refugees, weren't they? And doesn't France have citizenship based on being born in France? I would think that takes up the vast majority of the Muslim population that have citizenship.

And I may be completely wrong here, but most countries don't grant citizenship to sick or disabled people. That comes under 'being a burden to society'. Do you know if France has that rule? Would an autistic person in fact qualify for citizenship? They might be granted residency, but not citizenship.

Citizenship is given due to birth, for the most part. People born in France are often born with disabilities. If that happens, their citizenship isn't revoked (thank goodness). The reason I brought it up is to say that there are people who are French citizens by birth who may end up in the same boat, which is not conforming to a particular norm. That means that it's not a single test of assimilation, and 100% of France doesn't follow that particular view.

There would be literally no cultural norm that absolutely every single citizen of any country would conform to, and expecting as such is a fantasy.

1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said:

I see 4,000 applicants were denied citizenship in Australia, mainly because either they couldn't prove who they were or because of a criminal record of some kind. But also there's a 120,000 person backlog of applicants. I guess that's another way to get around handing out citizenship, no?

I assume this is meant to suggest "whataboutism" but, for one thing, this doesn't prove or disprove your point one way or another. 

To respond to it anyway, though, Australia had a brief period of excellent and progressive immigration policies, especially for refugees fleeing war and economic migrants looking for better opportunities. It tended to peak with the Fraser and Hawke governments of the late 70s until the early 90s. These tend to still be practised in Victoria and New South Wales, two of the states, but are no longer federal policy. Sadly, Australia's assistance to refugees ended for the most part in the mid-90s with the introduction of mandatory imprisonment until refugee applications were settled.

Then it was made more draconian ever since, and has trended as such. Immigration as a whole was dragged into the same argument and now the barriers to immigration are much higher than they were.

Which is far from a good thing, I'd say. I'm not at all pleased with Australia's immigration history - from 1901 until 1975 the immigration policy was literally called, "White Australia."

[Martell Spy]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

With all due respect, this is not up for debate.

The woman specifically said she was refusing the handshake on religious grounds ; there's no "what ifs" here. Her religion clearly prevents her full assimilation, because physical contact between men and women is part of French culture. 

There are many things to be debated here, but her failure to assimilate is not one of them. 

The larger question is whether it's a good thing that a Western country suddenly decides immigrants need to fully conform to its traditions to be granted citizenship, or that conforming to certain traditions is mandatory.

But that's like questioning the relevance of citizenship tests and requirements to begin with. If a country may choose mandatory requirements to grant citizenship then a handshake may be a valid test indeed. 

I was originally pointing out that such a test actually does make sense in a French context, funnily enough. 

I can agree with you that countries do have a right to make arbitrary decisions on entry and citizenship. Do you think it's a great thing though if they choose to do this? I mean, I recognize that the U.S. has the right to do this, but I find the various bullshit they put immigrants through to be pretty excessive. If some people want to come and pitch in to Social Security, I generally want them to get in here. I'd be pretty annoyed if my government were rejecting them over something like this.