Maybe things would have been different if the YMCA in Outremont, Que. used a film to cover its windows that allowed women to see outside as they exercised, but prevented passers-by from seeing inside.

Instead, in response to the Y’s Hasidic neighbours, the windows were frosted. No one can see in; no one can see out.

This concession to the Hasidim, a puritanical Jewish sect whose dress and views on the place of women are rooted in the 18th century, was played up in Quebec’s populist media as one of the first cases of “reasonable accommodation” run amok.

“Reasonable accommodation” is now code in Quebec for unwarranted concessions to non-Christian groups and immigrants.

When Premier Jean Charest named the Bouchard-Taylor Commission this past February to look into the issue just before the provincial spring election, the frosted Y windows were on the top of his list of incidents justifying the province-wide forum that sometimes sounds like a witch hunt.

Charest also mentioned other situations such as replacing women police officers with men when dealing with Hasidic men; a man who was asked to leave a swimming pool so Islamic women could swim; and the Québécois ambulance driver who could not eat his non-kosher spaghetti in the cafeteria of a Jewish hospital.

Instead of setting out the universal values of the equality of women and respect for differences in a pluralistic society, Charest looked back over his shoulder at Mario Dumont. Dumont’s Action démocratique du Québec was gaining in the polls and Charest wanted to establish his own nationalist credibility.

“These are not reasonable accommodations,” Charest said at the time. “These are contrary to the values of our nation.”

In fact, fuelled by his defence of Quebec’s French character and its lingering Catholic values, the ADQ jumped from Quebec’s third party, with five seats in the National Assembly, to become the official Opposition, ahead of the Parti Québécois.

Since the Bouchard-Taylor hearings began this fall — with daily complaints about Islamic women covering their heads, Sikh kirpans and the “MK” designation on kosher food products — Dumont’s popularity has remained strong.

But Charest is having trouble winning back French Quebec, in which Liberal support has fallen to 15%.

In September, the Liberal brass proposed resolutions defining Quebec as a “civic cohesive nation,” only to face a revolt by ethnic Liberals who remain loyal to Charest. They saw his attempt to jump on the identity bandwagon as a betrayal of the party’s federalist roots.

Pauline Marois, who succeeded André Boisclair as PQ leader in June, recently played a trump in the identity game with her bill to create Quebec citizenship as an add-on to Canadian citizenship. It would be granted automatically to all Canadian citizens in the province, but immigrants and migrants from other provinces would have to pass tests to prove their ability to speak French and their knowledge of Quebec’s history and culture.

Legal experts dismiss the proposal as unconstitutional because, if implemented, only Quebec citizens could run in school board, municipal or National Assembly elections.

But the PQ identity bill polarized Quebecers. The non-francophone minority was fiercely opposed whereas the francophone majority, which was ready to give Dumont a try, started giving Marois a second look.

André Drouin’s “code for life,” adopted by the municipal council of Hérouxville, Que., forbids the burning, stoning and genital excision of women. Kirpans and religious head coverings are also banned in this village — home to only one immigrant family.

Drouin argued at the Bouchard-Taylor Commission that if Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms cannot be amended to make Canada a secular society, Quebec must become an independent secular country with no tolerance for religion.

Quebecers are now looking ahead through a frosted window — and it isn’t at all clear how this debate will end. IE