[Skip Header] Friend Requests Messages Notifications HomeProfile Account(more) [End of Header]

About this Author

Sadaqat khan helps food distribution to the poor.

The War of the Women

by Sadaqat khan on April 01, 2012

The War of the Women

By Yahiya Emerick & Reshma Baig

A popular English saying says that "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." The meaning being that if a woman feels like something unfair happened to her, her anger will be limitless. I'm not going to say that that is necessarily true or not, but I have seen shades of it in the world-wide war between women who wear the Hijab (head-scarf) and those who want to oppose it.

Why do I describe it as a war? If you have to ask then you haven't been paying much attention to what women talk about in public meetings, articles, lectures, and even among themselves. The battle consists, quite interestingly, of four distinct war-fronts. There are 1) the women who wear Hijab out of conviction that it is the Islamic thing to do. Then there are 2) the women who wear it only because their mothers and grandmothers wore it; unaware of its true Islamic significance. The third group, 3) the non-Muslim feminists, rally against anything that covers up even one inch of the female form, but we already expected this from them. And finally, 4) there are the secular "Muslim" women, who almost never practice Islam anyway, but who have Muslim names and roots, who make it a point to appear at all Muslim gatherings with hair fashionably styled in full public glory.

For the sake of this article, one issue must be clear from the outset (so as not to ruffle the feathers of too many readers): An operative definition of the Hijab-wearing woman must be constructed. Albeit, as described above, not all Hijab wearers are alike. Women wear the Hijab for varying reasons. In reality, there also exists those noble and true Muslim sisters who wear Hijab because it is Islamically correct. They perceive it as intrinsically empowering. In addition, the Hijab is not a facade (the "I'll wear Hijab then do whatever I like" attitude). The operative definition of a true Hijab wearing Muslim woman is one who correctly follows the guidelines of Qur'an and Sunnah and whose only motivation is to please Allah. (Qur'an 33:59) This type of Hijab wearing woman is intelligent, Allah-fearing, overcoming the temporal trappings of the life of this world, and ultimately very happy with her decision. She is not out to please anyone except her Creator.

Now as stated previously, there are the four groups in this Battle of the Scarf. But it's not a fair war. Although it would seem that there are two factions on each side, in fact, the culturally-based Hijab wearing women are no help to their Islamically-oriented sisters. The cultural Hijab-wearers don't look at their Hijab as an Islamic duty, but rather as an affiliation with some old-country culture. And in fact, they wear it only out of habit.

Obviously, then, the daughters of such women, feeling more "American" than Arab, Indian, Nigerian (or any culture transmitted by family origin), never wear the Hijab themselves because it's just "culture" and thus the cultural women are no help in the Islamic struggle. Their own offspring become some other "culture" just as they are only motivated by what they grew up with themselves.

Have you ever seen the women, walking in "full" Hijab, but then their two or three daughters, even if they're teenagers, are dressed completely like non- Muslims? It's incredibly common. I feel like asking those mothers. Why are you even wearing Hijab if it wasn't important enough for you to pass on to your daughters?

So the Islamically-oriented Hijab-wearers are quite alone in the face of the assault by the feminists/secular "Muslimahs". The relationship between those two erstwhile allies is strange. The agenda of the Western feminists has always been puzzling. They cry about equality and respect but then push for things that dehumanize women and put them at the mercy of merciless men. They'll say women should be respected for their minds rather than for their bodies, but then they'll say that women should go around in mini-skirts and g- strings. It's funny how some ultra-Feminists argue with pride that the only professions in which women earn more money than men are prostitution and fashion modeling--then, while complaining against violence towards women, they try to encourage more women to be "empowered" by disrobing (utilizing work- place fashions that place more emphasis on the female figure rather than intelligence and qualifications).

Men are an aggressive lot. If you take away clothes from a woman, the man is not suddenly going to start respecting her. Rather he's going to take it as a green light to chase after her. It's interesting how so many male fashion designers are worshipped by Western, European, and now even "Muslim" women. (Armani, De La Renta, Gucci, Mizrahi, Lauren, etc...)

It doesn't take an analyst from Fashion Avenue to figure out that a man will design clothes for women that fits one main criteria: That the outfit be pleasing and attractive to the eyes of a man. From this arises the catch- phrase: "powerful and sexy". Some cultural "Muslims" with more of an interest in fashion (rather than their love for Allah) heed the call of Vogue, Glamour, and Cosmopolitan rather than the guidelines for dress in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Unfortunately, both "Muslim" men and women have fallen prey to the paradigms of worldly dressing. (Is it really dress for success or dress for sex?). Some brothers are ashamed of their wives and daughters wearing the Hijab in public (the "you look too dowdy with that thing on your head" syndrome.) Some women discourage their own Muslim sisters from wearing the Hijab saying that they'll "never succeed" or "just look old-fashioned and oppressed", or as I've overheard time and time again, "you only need to wear Hijab on Eid or at Jumu'ah prayer".

It must be added here that Muslim women are not being encouraged to dress dowdy, sloppy, or out of the "mode". It is merely being asserted that what is touted as fashionable is not necessarily empowering--or flattering-- in the real sense of the word. Islam arrived on the scene more than 1400 years ago to fortify a woman's dignity; introducing the concept of "covering the parts that elicit desire". Time and time again it is implored that "Allah is beautiful and loves beauty." Our Creator made us beautiful and the dictates of "modern" fashion morph that beauty into something exploitative and ugly.

The feminists say that women should be free and independent, never relying on any man. So the message men extract from this is that now they can have as many lovers as they want and never have to be tied down to one woman ever again. Consequently, a woman who dates can expect to go from man to man for twenty years or more before she can succeed in tying one down in marriage. And now women have to dress even more alluring to attract men, and have to work harder to keep them around lest the "roving eye" spots another, younger, prettier catch. Women, as polls have shown,

1 Comment

thank you for sharing this nice post, keep your great work.

13 months ago