On the latest Global Pulse episode, host Erin Coker talks about the evolving world of Islamic fashion. Watch the episode below and share your thoughts!

When I was studying in France a few years ago, I taught at a high school in a largely Muslim suburb. One of the most profound rituals of daily life at Voillaume high school happened during the few minutes immediately before and after the school day. Many Muslim girls would arrive at the school gate wearing the traditional Islamic head covering called the hijab, (Arabic for “scarf”). Seconds before entering the gate, they would whip off their hijabs, and they would just as rapidly reapply them as they exited through the gate when the school day ended. The speed and grace with which these girls would take off and put on their hijabs, within feet of the school entrance, fascinated me.

But, why did they have to take them off? Because restrictions passed in 2004 disallow religious head coverings in public schools in France. The French government argues that the wearing of hijabs in public schools is an affront to the concept of “laïcité,” and threatens secular government. The vast majority of Muslim youth I encountered in France, many recent immigrants, cherished the personal liberties that France gave them. In fact, students I spoke with who objected to the policy didn’t frame the headscarf controversy in terms of the government suppressing Islam, but rather as a kind of hypocrisy - the French government limiting the same personal freedoms it claimed to defend.

Nonetheless, they understood the secular nature of the French government and would find the idea of replacing it with an Islamic version as preposterous. Compare this to Iran, where the hijab is compulsory. A new generation of Iranians wants increased freedom from a stifling dress code that has been in place since the Islamic revolution. Simply put, many young women in Iran are sick of religious modesty laws and other limitations on their personal freedoms. Some women are fighting the dress code by following it to the bare minimum. As opposed to wearing the chador – a traditional loose garment covering the entire body (and still worn by Iran’s most religious women), many young Iranian women have adopted modifications that comply with the law but allow a degree of fashion and mobility. These modifications include jackets that sufficiently cover the body but are form fitting and stylish. Some wear hijabs in bright, lively colors instead of traditionally modest monotones. An Iranian journalist who has worked for increased rights for women in Iran, responded to these newer fashions by saying, "It signals that we obey the law, but nothing more than that." 

The objectives of women who want to wear hijab in France, and those who would like to moderate it in Iran, are different. But the desire to have freedom to dress as one sees fit is essentially the same. When governments mandate how people can and can’t dress, they aren’t just trying to control what people wear, but how they feel. But does the Iranian government really think that easing restrictions on Islamic dress would instantaneously lead to a rise of Paris Hilton clones, promiscuous activity and the forsaking of Islam? Does the French administration really believe that allowing Muslim schoolgirls to wear the hijab will lead to a sort of “Franganistan,” where women lose all rights and Islam replaces secular governance?

The fact that many French girls reapply the hijab as soon as they leave the gates of school, and that many Iranian women see modesty laws not as a symbol of their relationship with God but as an imposed annoyance, shows the ultimate failure of the social engineering schemes in these two countries. While governments can dictate how people dress, they ultimately can’t change how people feel.

For this week's Global Pulse episode, Bonus Battle, host Erin Coker asks whether France's new bonus restrictions are workable. Share your thoughts and watch this episode below!

A leader whose extravagant lifestyle once earned him the moniker "President Bling-Bling," Nicolas Sarkozy has adopted a tough stance against financial excess in recent weeks. Following national furor over banking giant BNP Paribas' partial use of government bailout funds to finance a one billion euro bonus payout, new rules require French banks to spread bonus payments over three years, with one-third of bonuses to be paid in stocks. If a trader's investments lose money, the trader also loses the bonus.

The French president has since taken his bonus battle to the international stage, calling for broad global measures to curb traders' compensation, including a fixed international limit on bonuses. Sarkozy even threatened to walk out of the G-20 summit if leaders fail to reach an agreement on bonuses.

European Commission President José Barroso told Bloomberg television that citizens "are horrified" by banks' use of government funds to pay bonuses, and that international bonus restrictions could "restore credibility to the financial system."

Although American and British leaders agree on the need for financial regulation, they have balked at the idea of bonus caps. President Obama is "reluctant to set individual compensation levels." It is looking like Sarkozy may compromise on the caps, as long as the larger package is put in place.

Debates over bank bonuses are also raging outside of the political sphere. Earlier this year, American and British outrage over executive bonuses spurred demonstrations from Wall Street to London. However, as the global economy shows signs of recovery, some experts have questioned the need to quell bonuses.

"I don't think, ultimately, people really care that much about banker bonuses," writes Daniel Indiviglio in a recent Atlantic Monthly article. "The only reason they do now is because there was a financial crisis. Once things get better, most of that anger dissipates." He adds: "The bonus culture isn’t what caused the financial crisis, it was a culmination of factors."

The Washington DC-based Institute for Policy Studies hailed the Sarkozy decision, arguing that European government action "will open up opportunities in Washington for real change to an executive compensation system that now threatens our economy and our democracy."

But even some French supporters are doubtful that the global financial world will embrace the measures. "Sarkozy's idea is a good one," Nicolas Bouchard, a 32-year-old Paris-based corporate attorney told Global Pulse in an email. "But it is a difficult one to carry out in a global system.  Paris is a small financial center in comparison with Wall Street or London."

One self-described French "utopist" offered another way that Sarkozy could display support for the end of economic excess. In an email to Global Pulse, Alexandre Carpentier, 28, challenged summit attendees to forgo luxury hotels in favor of more modest accommodations.

"It would help the local economy, there would be less rioting and people would be proud of their leaders," the Paris-based competition lawyer explained.

A bit of a stretch? Probably. But a reminder that in a world recovering from financial fallout, public scrutiny is on political leaders as much as it is on banks -- particularly a president trying to distance himself from a "bling-bling" image.