She didn't know she could vote, but she "chose" to wear the niqab?

Sure, right, I believe that.

She'd fail her citizenship application in the States, too. I mean c'mon, if you don't even know about suffrage. It wasn't just about the niqab. Sounds like she was kept in ignorance on many levels. Even a victim of systemic psychological abuse and control may be allowed to drive to the supermarket and back, so I'm not convinced by those details. The human mind is a funny thing, and it's scary how easy it is enslaved.

Who held back all this information anyway? Probably the same men--in her family or community--who put the black tent over her head in the first place.

women sticking up for their own oppression--gotta love 'em.

It seems in this case that the husband was born a French citizen so there is no way for the government to deny his application. But I will offer to supply a possible reasoning in a similar case but this time the husband is not a citizen. I would first say that he would probably not receive citizenship in that situation. The reason for her not to get citizenship in this situation is basically the same as in the story. It might be outside forces that are making a women wear the "bee keeper suit" (and i use that term with all the disrespect possible) but by keeping her from getting citizenship it might send a message to these outside forces that if they want the wife to be a French citizen she must be allowed to be at least worth most of a man than none of a man. It might seem harsh and I would agree but with out the women coming forward and asking for help or asylum there is not alot that the government can do.

if i remember correctly, the judge informed the applicant that she was not sufficiently assimilated because she was in total and complete submission to her male relatives. additionally, Amara said she hoped the ruling would "dissuade certain fanatics from imposing the burqa on their wives."

let's say for a moment that it's true that women in the niqab are not choosing to wear it, and that they are, indeed, being forced to by their husbands and fathers. if this is the case, why punish the women? why isn't the applicant's HUSBAND who is being denied citizenship for insufficient assimilation since he is apparently the one forcing his wife to wear the damn thing? why aren't men who "require" their wives to wear niqab or burqa the ones being punished?

even if we decide to accept the French point of view that women are being forced to dress in this manner (and this is, of course, not necessarily the case) it STILL makes no sense to punish women for being forced into what Amara herself called "a prison... a straitjacket...[and] the insignia of a totalitarian political project that advocates inequality between the sexes."

good work france! way to punish the victims of inequality!

It's always amusing when a woman describes some relic of oppression as her own choice. American (and probably French) women do that all the time and then add, "and isn't feminism about choice?" It's very amusing.