~Made this rebloggable cuz~
Anonymous asked:
WTF is up with that random “anti-hijab” at the end there?? Oh, yes, ABOUT ME: anti-Christian, anti-Muslim, anti-Judaism, ANTI-HIJAB??? WTF????????????? that insertion seems so ridiculous and random? and might I add, do you hate other Muslim headcoverings? and whY????
I am not referring to the common manifestation of the hijab, but rather the concept of hijab.
See this:
Each one of those head coverings is different. Yet they are all hijab.
But the hijab doesn’t just cover head coverings.
Acc. to Wikipedia, the goddess of knowledge:
According to Islamic scholarship, hijab is given the wider meaning of modesty, privacy, and morality; the words for a headscarf or veil used in the Qur’an are khimār (خمار) and jilbaab (جلباب), not hijab. Still another definition is metaphysical, where al-hijab refers to “the veil which separates man or the world from God.”
So hijab isn’t just a head covering, but more of a way of life. Specifically, the kind of hijab used depends on what the culture conceives as being the awrah (عورة), or the parts of the body that need to be concealed (esp during prayer).
Since the search function on tumblr is fucked, I can’t give you specific examples, but hijab almost always includes directions as to the rest of their clothing.
Southern Muslimas (it amuses me greatly to think of the confusion of Islamophobes encountering a Muslima with a Southern drawl), at least from what I’ve seen, often Al-Amira with tight pants made of thin fabric or plain ol’ jeans, plus a long-sleeve shirt with something loose and drapey over it.
But is that hijab?
I’ve seen posts on here- so sorry for the lack of examples- that dictate some pretty severe and idiotic rules for hijab. Such things include:
- No makeup
- No bright colors
- No pants
- No sleeves (yeah, that one)
- No jewelry
Now, here are a few technical issues I have with the concept of hijab:
- I am pro-sexuality. Hijab is anti-sexuality.
- I support the natural human body, and I am against body-shaming. Hijab is against the human body in its natural form.
But, as always, these are the manifest functions of hijab. How about the latent functions?
- Hijab is never applied to men and women equally. This is injustice.
- Hijab is sometimes applied to women to the point that impedes their function. EG: Wearing a full, black-colored outfit in a hot, humid climate; the burqini; wearing a niqab/burqa (face concealment); etc.
- Hijab is often exploited to give men a great excuse for sexual immorality or even crime. Examples: blaming rape victims for not being hijab enough; threatening a woman with responsibility for male sin for not being hijab enough, etc.
And others that aren’t coming to mind atm.
But the BIGGEST issue I have is the long-standing cultural change as a result of the enforcement of hijab.
Some reasonably possible scenarios could include:
- A changing perception of men regarding women who follow hijab. There’s the possibility of them holding the more extreme hijabi up to higher respect and honor than those who hold the less rigorous versions. Slut-shaming.
- Another changing perception of men regarding women who hold less severe versions of the hijab. There’s the probable possibility of slut-shaming- that is, women who wear less severe versions of the hijab will be regarded by men as being less pious, possibly more promiscuous, possibly intentionally trying to force men into sin.
- This, in turn, leads to victim-blaming: a woman gets sexually harassed/etc, and she was wearing the shayla and not the al-amira? Why was she doing that? Was that intentional seduction? Was she trying to have that happen to her? When a man commits an anti-woman crime, was it really his fault?
- What about perceptions of “Western women”? I know I don’t have to say much on this, as it’s seen quite a bit. Ask for clarification.
- And, of course, the female counterparts! A woman who wears a less rigorous version of the hijab may feel like she does not deserve respect. A woman may feel as if she must be as hijab as possible in order to rightfully deserve respect, and that if she doesn’t, she is dirty, etc. And when something happens to her, will she blame herself for not being hijab enough? Or when something happens to a friend, will she blame her?
Now, those are all speculations on changing cultural effects. If you’d like me to clarify those concepts, just ask, but it’s too tangential for here.
Finally! Last, but not least.
Modesty is an illogical and misogynistic concept.
This goes for ALL religions. Catholic mantillas. German baptist head coverings. Nun veils. All of em. But, for the sake of argument, let’s stress modesty as it manifests in Islam.
Let’s do this!
I. Modesty is illogical.
What is modesty? Let’s ask the dictionary, obviously. [This will be entered as soon as my dictionary installs]
Huh. Wow. So let’s go a wee bit further back into religion.
A. Objectivity of truth
One thing an established religion requires is that truth be objective. When it comes to objectivity/subjectivity, you can only have one or the other: Truth is always true (objectivity), or truth is not always true (subjectivity). Truth is true across all time (objectivity), or truth changes according to time (subjectivity). And- here’s the important one- truth is true in all cultures (objectivity) or truth is true according to cultures (subjectivity).
B. Organized religion requires objective truth.
It’s easy to figure this one out! Is Islam always true? Is Allah not still the one true god in the Americas as well as the Eastern hemisphere? Is Mohammad not Allah’s prophet in 2012, as he was during his lifetime? Is the Qu’ran not still the book of revealed truth from Allah and Mohammad in Gentilly as it is in Mandeville?
Islam is objective. It has to be.
C. What determines modesty?
Oh shit. Now here’s the meat of the tomato.
We looked at the definition of modesty- the manifest function, if you will- but let’s look at the latent functions, the way it exists.
Here I will give you several separate scenarios. Rate them on a scale of 1 - 10, where 5 is neutral, 1 is extremely conservative and 10 is extremely immodest.
The situations:
1. a) You see a woman wearing a bikini top and board shorts at a Mississippi beach in summer. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
1. b) You see a woman wearing a bikini top and board shorts at a lesbian bar. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
1. c) You see a woman wearing a bikini top and board shorts at a place of worship. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
We’re nowhere near finished.
2. a) You see a woman wearing jeans and a low-cut shirt at a Mississippi beach in summer. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
2. b) You see a woman wearing jeans and a low-cut shirt at a lesbian bar. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
2. c) You see a woman wearing jeans and a low-cut shirt at a place of worship. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
3. a) You see a woman wearing loose clothing and an Al-Amira at a Mississippi beach in summer. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
3. b) You see a woman wearing loose clothing and an Al-Amira at a lesbian bar. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
3. c) You see a woman wearing loose clothing and an Al-Amira at a place of worship. What would your numbers be if:
- You were a nudist and think nudity is neutral?
- You think jeans and a t shirt is neutral?
- You think loose clothing and an Al-Amira is neutral?
So what the living hell determines modesty? If you’re a nudist and you see a woman wearing jeans and a low cut shirt at a beach, you’d think she’s being excessively modest. If you think jeans and a t shirt are neutral, if you see a woman wearing the same at a bar, you’d think she’s being modestly-neutral. If you think an Al-Amira and loose clothing are neutral, if you see a woman wearing the same at a bar, you’d think she’s being immodesty. Welp welp welp. In fact, let’s make it super simple. You have a nudist, an average American, and a pro-burqa extremist in a coffee shop. A woman can walk in wearing one outfit, and all three observers will have different opinions on their modesty. So it looks like modesty is not defined by the actions of the person attempting modesty. That sounds awfully… subjective if modesty depends on another person’s disposition. So.
If objectivity is required for something to be true, and modesty does not have objectivity, it can’t be true.
Viola. Modesty is illogical.
II. Modesty is misogynistic.
Personally, I define misogyny as giving women unequal treatment from men. You, or anyone, can fight that one out with me later.
In its application:
- For women, modesty is given more importance.
- For women, the requirements for modesty are more restricting.
- The cultural/religious repercussions for women are harsher.
This is misogyny.
Almost the end.
I oppose misogyny and inequality. I oppose irrationality.
I oppose the concept of hijab.
The end.
