(Un)veiled: Muslim Women Talk About Hijab is a documentary that tackles the role of veils such as the Hijab or Niqab in the lives of Muslim women. Recognizing that Islam encompasses over a billion people worldwide, the documentary features the narratives of multiple women from across the globe. The film contextualizes conversations about the Hijab through factors like culture and religion to produce a well-rounded portrayal of Muslim discourse within the community. While (Un)veiled does an excellent job of disrupting the notion that Islam is monolithic by including variety of interviewees and perspectives, it merely complicates the assertion that veiled Muslim women are oppressed by failing to establish if wearing a Hijab or Niqab is a woman’s …show more content…
The film features testimonies from women wearing many different forms of coverings such as the Hijab or Niqab. This representation alone, helps to normalize such coverings, merely by making them visible to the audience. Couple with this representation, the testimonies featured by women who viewed hijab as a choice, assisted in the normalization of Islamic modesty. Somaia, a woman who wears the Niqab, wants others to know that “wearing [the Niqab] doesn’t stop [her] from doing anything” (23:45). While at no point in the documentary does Somaia address if wearing the Niqab was her choice, but she does make a point to stress that it is not limiting. While these assurances dismantle some skepticism the West feels towards veiled women, unfortunately Somaia’s comments do not go far enough to reassure a Western audience that Eastern women have full autonomy over their choices. In the documentary, Dr. Hamdan, an American Muslim convert, believes that “[her] lord told [her]to wear hijab. [She’ll] wear it willingly. It is not a symbol of oppression” (17:20). For Dr. Hamdan, the Quran calls upon her to exhibit modesty and because she’s a practicing Muslim, she will follow such a calling willingly. While she views wearing the Hijab as a choice for …show more content…
When discussing the Niqab, one woman admonished that, “people identify people by their faces for God sake. This is something that is God given, why the hell should I cover my face to that extent where you only see my eyes? So it’s that that is a complete extreme that I think that has been misinterpreted and it shouldn’t be that way at all” (22:40). While this narrative does not directly assert that the Niqab is an oppressive garment, its rhetoric plays into the Western view on the Niqab. With such a stark condemnation of the article as an appropriate interpretation of the Quran, this woman alienates the only argument that defends the use of the Niqab to the West. Even with the less controversial Hijab, the documentary reinforces the narrative that wearing it is not always a choice. Manar, a British Muslim, admits that she was “forced to put [her hijab] on” (20:25). While she concedes that she now understands her father’s decision, her initial admission that veiling was forced upon her, fortifies Western views on the oppressive nature of Islamic traditions that pertain to modesty. If women do not choose to wear the Hijab, it cannot be liberating as many women describe it. Another interviewee complicates the notion of choice entirely by implying that young women who wear the Hijab
In the article, Chesler uses several persuasive appeals in an attempt to convince readers to support France’s ban on head coverings. While some may argue that banning religious clothing infringes on Islamic law, Chesler points out that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” In an appeal to logos, Chesler uses facts, gathered from educated Muslim women and Islamic scholars, to show that this argument is illogical because the burqa is not required. Chesler continues logos appeals by citing the Sheikh of al-Azhat University as saying “The niqab is tradition. It has no connection to religion.” This passage demonstrates ethos as well, but carries on the idea that burqas and niqabs are not required by Islamic law, making the ban perfectly logical. The idea is that, since these garments are not mandatory in the Koran’s broad requisite of “modest dress,” the ban does not infringe on religious rights, making the ban a logical choice. Chesler takes the argument one step further by insisting that the burqa is not only optional, it is detrimental to wearers. The argument that “it is a human rights violation and constitutes both a health hazard and is a form of torture” to women who wear burqa exhibits both logos and pathos. By pointing out that burqas are a possible “health hazard,” Chesler uses unappealing syntax to make readers believe that burqas are unhealthy and i...
The article “My Body Is My Own Business” by Naheed Mustafa is about an Islamic women’s principle that putting on her usual headscarf, or Hijab, actually empowers her as a female, contrary to the popular principle that the hijab represents male oppressiveness. She ex...
For some women wearing a veil is not something that is forced on them but rather a choice of their own. Martha Nussbaum and Maysan Haydar are both authors that try to explain their reasoning that veiling isn't an oppressive tool used against women. Martha Nussbaum's article “Veiled Threats”, is a political and philosophical take on why banning the burqa is a violation of human rights. On the other hand Maysan Haydar’s article “Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering”, is a more humorous and personal take on why veiling shouldn't be as judged or stereotyped. Though Nussbaum and Haydar have equal goals this essay is being used to understand the main argument, claims and whether or not each article has any weaknesses.
Ever pass by Muslim woman in a hijab at the mall or park and think how oppressive and restraining her culture must be? Maysan Haydar, a New York social worker who practices the Muslim tradition of veiling, believes otherwise. In her article, “Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering,” Haydar highlights on her experiences as a Muslim living in an American culture, where showing more skin is the “norm.” Haydar speaks specifically to a crowd who unconsciously makes assumptions about certain Muslim practices, in hopes of sharing the truth behind them. Haydar suggests that, contrary to popular belief, not all Muslim women cover themselves strictly as an “oppressive” religious practice, but that some women, like herself, find
She makes the case that Western feminists have radically misinterpreted the veil. For many Muslim women, the veil acts as a divide between the public and private. The veil may actually liberate women from “the intrusive, commodifying, basely sexualizing Western gaze”. The veil frees women from the oppressive hyper-sexualization of found in Western culture. Reducing the veil to a symbol of oppression disregards the possibility of female agency outside a Western feminist paradigm. The veil has the potential to liberate women in the public space. Projecting our Western notions of sexuality and gender roles denies the possibility of different forms of sexual
O'Neill, B., Young, L., Gidengil, E. and Cote, C. (2014). Freedom of religion, women's agency and banning the face veil: the role of feminist beliefs in shaping women's opinion. Ethnic and Racial Studies, [online] pp.1-5. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2014.887744 [Accessed 28 May. 2014].
Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving by Lila Abu-Lughod describes Western feminist beliefs on Muslim women and their burqa/veil and how focusing on these misconceptions are doing far more harm than good. This causes Western feminists reduce the culture and beliefs of Muslim women down to a single piece of clothing. The burqa is a type of veil worn by Muslim women for a number of reasons such as proprietary and signaling their relationship with God. The burqa is often seen a symbol of suppression amongst the Western world and it was expected for women to throw it off in a show of independence once liberated from the Taliban. The saving of Muslim women is often used to justify the “War on Terrorism” as exemplified in Laura Bush 's 2001 speech. The belief that Muslim women needed saving existed before the “War on Terrorism” as seen when Marnia Lazreg wrote about a skit where two Afghan girls talked about the beauty of the free Christian France.
The video “I wear a niqab” is about a muslim girl called Margaret Wente who is passionate about politics. She says “the only features she sees about niqab are are in a war torn area, or a woman who was honour killed or a woman who was beaten by her husband, or a woman who was forbidden from going or studying what she wanted” which she doesn’t like. For her the significance of niqab is that she sees a woman talking and speaking her mind and that it is her choice to wear it. She says that she can’t just sit down next to people because they intensely fear her which she comments is reasonable because all the stuff the media says about muslim people. She says it's not as hard for her to see and interact with others now because it's getting better
Fatemeh Fakhraie’s essay “Scarfing it Down,” explains how Muslim women suffer because of what they wear. Fakhraie blogs about Muslim women in her website she explains; “Seeing ourselves portrayed in the media in ways that are one-dimensional and misleading." Several people judge Muslim's by their appearance because they assume they're a bad person. The author of this essay wants the reader to know that Muslim women wearing a hijab are not a threat to the world.
Professor Leila Ahmed, active Islamic feminist, in her article “Reinventing the veil” published in the Financial Times assumes that there is a connection between “advancement” and veiling, which means that unveiled women are advanced and vice versa. In addition, she supports that it led to increasing rate of violence. She questions why women wear veil, that is considered as “symbol of patriarchy and women’s oppression”. However, research changed her position towards wearing veil. Firstly, she states that wearing veil was essential for women, because it could be beneficial and influence to how people treat women, in terms of job, marriage and free movement in public. Secondly, her assumption was explained while interviewing women, who stated
One of Sultana Yusufali’s strongest arguments in “My body is my own business” is her scrutinization of the exploitation of female sexuality. Initially Yusufali writes about the injudicious individuals that assume she is oppressed by her hijab. Thereafter, she describes them as “brave individuals who have mustered the courage to ask me about the way I dress”. Moreover, Yusufali’s word choice is intriguing as she utilizes the word “brave” when laymen hear this word they habitually associate the aforementioned with heroic, valiant and courageous. Consequently, Yusufali ensues to comprise her opinions on the hijab and how it carries a number of negative connotations in western society. Furthermore, Yusufali proceeds to strike on the importance
In this excerpt, the burqa is described as “tight”, “heavy”, and “suffocating”, making it seem like an unpleasant garment to be ensconced in. The burqa can cause an “unnerving” feeling, which can make daily tasks hard to complete. When interviewing a girl in Afghanistan, Daniel Pipes, American historian, writer, and commentator, got her opinion on the burqa, “When I wear a burqa it gives me a really bad feeling. I don't like to wear it. I don't like it, it upsets me, I can't breathe properly.”
There are many different views towards Muslim choice of clothing especially wearing the veil. “I wear it believing it is necessary, but someone else can be wearing it believing that she is doing something extra” said Hamna Ahmed. One of the many reasons a Muslim can be wearing the veil are their own personal decisions too. Hamna has been wearing it for seven years now, despite her mother and three of her four sisters staying uncovered. Socially this causes an issue with the meaning of the veil and conflict with other groups. With many different consumptions of religion, what it means, what is considered to be practicing and what is not can lead to negative misunderstandings. Ultimately the decisions are up to the individuals although; there is likely to be misinterpretation between the meaningfulness of religion to family and society. On an even bigger scale of things this could also impact society and it...
Most of these things it is possible to see through the analysis of the situation that exists in practice and analysis of several court cases. In France, for years women with Hijab encounter problems, both in education and in ...
299). The study consisted of having in-depth personal interviews to share their experiences of being a Muslim American woman (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 300). Veiling to these women was a way of freedom while also having a Muslim identity (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 301). It was also a source of behavior control, to not be sexually objectified, a way of commanding respect from others and even a source of checking their own behavior (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 301). One of the women interviewed said, veiling to her was a way to feel connected to other Muslim woman who veil (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 302). Veiling can be a way to feel connected to your religion and God as well as being connected to those who practice the same faith, it can be considered an act of membership. Many of the women interviewed noted they have been removed from planes, been treated unfairly, and have had strangers shout at them all for just being Muslim and being more visibly recognized from veiling (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 303). This is an example of how media can affect the general population. When the media only shows radicals and compares all Muslims to being terrorist or dangerous they are actually putting Muslim people at risk of being assaulted in public. Muslim woman in particular are more at risk for being assaulted as they are more identifiable. So while veiling can be a source of empowerment and freedom for women it is a double-edged sword because it also puts them at further risk of being