Joan Ganz Cooney | 11/03/2009 1:00 pm

Joan Ganz Cooney 'Appalled' at Hillary Clinton's Head Scarf

I have to admit that I was appalled to see Hillary Clinton in a head scarf when she was in Ramallah recently on an official visit. First, I think a U.S. Government official when on government business is genderless, that it is not a woman official or a man official; just an official. Second, the head scarf is a symbol of the subjugation of women and a religious belief, at that. Would she wear a crucifix if she met with the pope? I’m sure she was told she should show respect for the culture but I have to ask why, when the culture supports beliefs that we and certainly Hillary Clinton are repelled by.

Click here to see Hillary Clinton’s picture on the Daily Beast.

Read more about: Gender, Hillary Clinton, Politics, Religion

180 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

I thought it was kind of pretty. I love that shade of blue.

By B Clark on 11/03/2009 1:27 pm

e-mail alert

I think when a govt official visits another country they should respect that other countries traditions no matter what. I’d want any other countries govt official to do the same.

By Beth Cornell on 11/03/2009 1:45 pm

e-mail alert

so when she visits afghanistan she will wear a burka , besides in the middle east (except Saudi arabia) it is accepted that non muslim women do not wear scarves or any head cover ONLY muslim women wear them and stil it is NOT mandatory for them either ,so what is she trying to achieve ,is she "more royal than the queen". The fanatic Muslims will view it as a win over US and embolden them to demand more concessions of the west (Sharia law comes to mind ) we in US and the west should stop being so naive to think that our secretary of state wearing a scarf will win the hearts and minds of those whose Allah ordered us infidels either convert to Islam or be killed

By robert tanagho on 11/03/2009 6:03 pm

e-mail alert

Sorry but protocol demands it. Tourists are the exception. If you are a guest of the government, however, you are expected to abide by the protocol. Not sure but I don’t think too many tourists are headed for Afghanistan. I am not clear on what the protocol in Afghanistan would be. Since she is not Muslim I doubt the government would require her to wear a naqib or a burka. The debate over the naqib is becoming very heated in Egypt. The government says women should not wear it when among themselves. The fundamentalists disagree.

By Baby Snooks on 11/03/2009 6:18 pm

e-mail alert

"The fanatic Muslims will view it as a win over US and embolden them to demand more concessions of the west (Sharia law comes to mind ) we in US and the west should stop being so naive to think that our secretary of state wearing a scarf will win the hearts and minds of those whose Allah ordered us infidels either convert to Islam or be killed"

I completely disagree. Fanatic Muslims, will see it as a ploy to win them over- and it won’t work. Everyone else will see it as a gesture of respect. And since most of the people in Pakistan are everyone else- it was an appropriate gesture. Oh- and last I looked Pakistan was on the Indian sub-continent- not the ME.

You also seem a little out of date. There is an ever growing amount of Muslims in the west- so it becomes increasingly meaningless to talk about "we in the West" in the way you do.

By Sandy B on 11/03/2009 10:35 pm

e-mail alert

Excellent points, Sandy B.

By Signing On on 11/03/2009 10:38 pm

e-mail alert

Thank you. Except of course, I don’t know where I got Pakistan from…she was in Ramallah :)

By Sandy B on 11/04/2009 8:33 am

e-mail alert

Great another right-wing fanatic.

By F P on 11/04/2009 5:22 am

e-mail alert

I agree, Robert Tanagho, that it would be useful for Americans to stop being so naive. Further, the city she was visiting was part of Jewish-held territory—by the Israeli government— it was not part of a separate "country" and "governed" by a questionable bunch of criminals. I recall that the last time I saw a photo of Clinton wearing this kind of scarf was with Mrs. Arafat, who skipped to Paris allegedly holding a large percentage of the money funneled to her husband by various Western countries, intended to help the poor "Palis".

By F Fox on 11/04/2009 12:20 pm

e-mail alert

F Fox and Robert Tanagho, count me in.

By True Grit on 11/04/2009 12:40 pm

e-mail alert

AKA Occupied Palestinian territory. So she was visiting representatives of the occupied Palestinian people. They’re not necessarily my cup of tea- but that’s what they have right now. You have to deal with what is- not what should be- or what you would like to be.

By Sandy B on 11/04/2009 1:09 pm

e-mail alert

Robert,

not everyone wears a burka in Afghanistan.

By Frannie Em on 11/04/2009 6:30 pm

e-mail alert

And in middle eastern countries that dictate that a woman must not appear in public unless accompanied by a male relative? Should our female officials have to drag a brother, husband or son where ever she goes so that we "respect that other countries traditions no matter what"? Methinks not. We don’t ask that officials wearing scarves remove them despite them not being customary here…why should we have to wear them where they are customary?

By Rachel F on 11/04/2009 1:55 pm

e-mail alert

I agree with most who have written here about this - Diplomacy is created from the respect and we show other countries. The respect of not defying the important norms of other countries, but making a comfortable atmosphere for dialog is where good nation to nation relationship is developed.

Any relationship must first begin with a respect for cultural and religious beliefs.

By Chris Broersma on 11/03/2009 1:48 pm

e-mail alert

I don’t find it at all apalling. The headscarf is not always a symbol of the subjugation of women. It is only when they are forced to wear it- or forced to take it off.

Hillary is a diplomat and she was being diplomatic.

By Sandy B on 11/03/2009 2:28 pm