No Hijabs or No Service

The Navy Federal Credit Union chain of credit unions across the nation have been coming under fire recently on the heels of reports that Muslim women wearing hijabs (the traditional head scarfs worn by many Muslim women) were asked to step out of line and be served behind closed doors. Apparently there has been some misunderstanding and miscommunication on the part of credit union employees regarding the new safety rules that were implemented recently. According to the new rules and regulations customers are requested to remove all "hats, hoods and sunglasses". It doesn't seem like much of a deal but some are beginning to worry that these incidents (one in southern Maryland and one in California... both at Navy Federal Credit Unions) could be a sign of things to come.

In the years since 9/11 I must say that there have been greater efforts made to decrease the amount of ignorance that is sadly running rampant about the religious and cultural practices of the world's diverse landscape of people. I remember that at one time, any man in a turban was considered to be a close-cousin of Osama bin Laden although they may have come from two completely distinct parts of the world. In the interim there have been many changes to the laws to allow for greater understanding and a relaxing of certain rules that were sometimes so loosely worded so as to leave the meaning open to broad interpretation.

Although the credit union employees admitted that there was no discriminatory motivation behind their actions, one is wondering whether in this day and age it still remains a point that people don't understand that someone wearing a hijab is doing so for religious or cultural reasons and not because they are carrying a bank robbery notice. The rule stated earlier about sunglasses and all is meant as a deterrent to prevent would-be bank robbers from entering a bank and hanging out for a little while before handing a robbery notice to one of the tellers. Indeed the tellers involved in these incidents admit that they didn't try to exclude the women from making their transactions but requested them to do them behind closed doors.

Why? That way they can isolate them and keep them from doing anything else? While it's understandable that events of the past few years have led many to be a little wary and reluctant to be trusting of everything and everyone but for all our efforts to continue to be a country based on equality, there are instances of pure ignorance like this that sully that reputation. Sure they wanted to served the woman but did they have to do so in the backrooms like she was some sort of criminal? And honestly, would there have been this kind of lackadaisical response had it been a blind man wearing sunglasses who was asked to be served in a back room? I think not.