Haydar Reading Response (Matt) ................................................................................................... 2
Argument Map ................................................................................................................................ 3
Haydar Class Plan (Jamie) ................................................................................................................ 4
Close Reading of key parts of the Argument/Playing Devil’s Advocate ......................................... 6
Reading Questions: Identifying the Questions in Abu-Lughod and Haydar (Jamie) ...................... 7
Examining Evidence in Haydar and Abu-Lugodh (Jamie) ................................................................ 8
Sample Prompt for assignment 1 + break down of points ............................................................. 9
Possible Outlines for Paper 1 ........................................................................................................11
Peer Review Workshop Haydar/Abu-Lugodh ...............................................................................12
Miscellaneous Haydar Teaching Notes .........................................................................................13
1

Pre-Reading Research:
1. Google image search hijab, burqah, chador,and salwar kameez, and describe the differences between them.
2. Look at http://www.bodyoutlaws.com/ and describe the types of essays that are published in this anthology?
Who seems to be the intended audience for this book and why?
Questions for the Text:
3. What is the central question Haydar is trying to answer?
4. What values seem important to Haydar? How does wearing a veil embody these values?
5. What types of evidence or reasons does she use to support her claims?
Directions: Write your response in complete sentences and paragraphs, answering all five questions. Proofread your text before turning it in. When providing textual support, use MLA parenthetical citation
( https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/02/ ).
Criteria: Reading Responses should be 300-350 words, roughly a little more than a page and a half, although longer responses are welcome. Because we will using MLA format for the larger papers in this course, it is good practice for your response to be typed 12 point font, double-spaced, Times New Roman, proper heading, and stapled. If you need help with MLA formatting, consult https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01/ .
Responses are due on the day scheduled; no make up or late responses. They will be graded credit/no credit.
Responses that have been turned in on time, yet have not sufficiently answered the questions will be allowed a revision turned in the next class meeting.
2

Project
MAJOR CLAIM The veil is a positive, affirmative choice for many Muslim women because it can reduce objectification, promote authentic relationships between men and women, and foster some important kinds of freedom. As she puts it, the veil can be “feminist, forward thinking, and progressive.” [AT THE HEART OF MY VEILING IS PERSONAL FREEDOM” - last sentence]
Claim Claim Claim Claim Claim
The veil can help women avoid damaging experiences and express values such as freedom, self-respect and modesty [260b]
Evidence for
Claim
The veil can foster relationships that are healthy because they are a) authentic, and b) whole - men come to know the entire woman.
The relationship is not about inauthenticity or superficial things
(looks and sex appeal. [263b]
Evidence for
Claim
Argument
Many people in the U.S. hold mistaken assumptions about the veil and Muslim women. They think it is forced on women.
The veil does not mean you have to be conservative, passive, or traditional.
Evidence for
Claim
[16] Western cultural values are “out of line”
(example: U.S. women get dressed up for strangers not intimates; they place too much value on body image alone.)
Evidence for
Claim
Evidence: 260a;
262b
People who think they know about Muslim cultures often have the most misguided assumptions.
Those who know little (hummus and Aladdin) are often more open.
Evidence for
Claim her experiences at school; construction sites;
Strategies that support claim/arg
Strategies that support claim/arg
Strategies that support claim/arg
Strategies that support claim/arg
Strategies that support claim/arg
3

Class business:
Call roll
Connection to previous class:
We worked on evidence, claims, and reasoning, which convince readers intellectually.
But humans aren’t purely intellectual, so arguments need to appeal to other elements.
Set up:
Rhetorical strategies:
Three categories according to Aristotle:
Logos – Greek for “word – appeal to reader’s intellect through evidence and reasoning
Pathos – Greek word derived from word for hearthbeat – appeal to reader’s emotions – causes reader to remember and to act on an argument
Notice that a skilled writer can select examples that also appeal to the emotions
Ethos – Greek for “moral character” – appeal to reader’s trust in the writer –
Categories of ethos: knowledgeable, shares audience values, fair-minded
Notice that ethos is closely related to many strategies that also increase the intellectual and emotional appeals of a text.
Strategies that are particularly significant in each category of appeals:
Logos:
Present Evidence
Analyze evidence
Pathos:
Vivid description
Tell story
Refer to items that carry meaning
Ethos:
Show expertise
Show share reader’s values
Acknowledge other positions
Acknowledge and refute objections
Qualify argument
Make concessions
Class Activity:
Group work (groups of 5)
1.
Locate two places where you see Haydar using strategies that appeal successfully to the emotions of the reader. What emotion is evoked in each of these places? How does she accomplish this – what is it about this part of the text that leads the reader to such an emotion, and why? And how might having
4

this particular emotional response make the reader more likely to agree with Haydar’s argument about the positive value of covering for women?
2.
Locate one place where you see Haydar using a strategy that appeals less successfully to the emotions of the reader. Why do you think this strategy is less successful than the first one? Can you think of a reader or group of readers who would find this strategy more successful than you do? Why might those readers respond differently?
3.
What does Haydar tell us about herself that might lead a reader to consider her knowledgeable about her topic? Do you think it is enough? What kinds of readers do you think would consider her as sufficiently knowledgeable? What kinds of readers might require more demonstration of her knowledge, and what might they want as further demonstration of her knowledge or expertise on the topic?
4.
Find three places where you see Haydar acknowledging positions regarding covering that are different from her own. Does she come across as fair-minded in each of these? Why or why not? How might her strategies here affect the reader’s view of Haydar as a person?
Scramble groups – divide each group into a.b.c.d, e and have the letters reform into new groups to discuss each other’s discoveries
Discussion:
Large group discussion of strategies and how successful they are.
Sum up:
Identify moments that show strategies. Connect to ethos, pathos, and/or logos. Evaluate.
So for next time:
We will start thinking about the values and assumptions of Haydar’s audience.
Homework:
Look up website for book, bodyoutlaws.com. Who would you identify as the audience for this book? What kinds of values do you think would be important to this audience? What ideas or even stereotypes might they have about the practice of covering?
5

What critical questions would you like to pose to Haydar? You may wish to play “devil’s advocate,” or imagine the response of a particularly skeptical, resistant audience.
1.
One of Haydar’s main claims is that “Western priorities are out of line: American women spend hours getting ready for strangers to see them but don’t give the same effort to those who see them in intimate settings.” (par. 17) Do you agree with her representation of “Western priorities”? Why/why not?
2.
One of Haydar’s claims is that Western/American women’s attitudes toward clothing, beauty and their bodies are distorted and oppressive. Can we problematize this framing of the issue, and the scope of the generalization?
3.
Does Haydar make assumptions you or others might disagree with? For example, what does she assume about “freedom,” “self-respect,” “individuality”? How does she define “modesty,” “authentic” relationships between men and women, what it means to be seen as a “whole person”?
- What does she assume about love and romance between men and women?
- Can you think of counterexamples or challenges to these assumptions?
4.
How does she represent those who disagree with her? (girl on bus; people on streets who think they know; women in office, etc.) Is this fair?
What about the rebuttals in the text (for example, paragraphs 7, 8, 11, 15). Can you imagine responses or counterarguments from those holding the positions described?
5.
One could argue that Haydar is rather “accomodationist” in her claim that an advantage of the veil is that it helps keep women safe from harassment and even sexual violence. Can you imagine feminists who might challenge Haydar’s position? What might they say?
6.
Read par. 18 closely – any critical questions? Haydar states that it would be unwise not to wear an
abaya in Saudi Arabia as it would “make getting around very difficult.” However, she then appears to equate this “difficulty” with the practical difficulties of an abaya in NYC.
7.
Haydar states that “many Americans see veiling as an oppressive tool forced on Muslim women by the men in our culture.” She may be right to challenge this assumption. But is she as attuned to the subtle pressures young girls face in Muslim families? In par. 3 she seems to take for granted that Muslim girls will wear a veil. Furthermore, in par. 22 she talks of how she went to elementary school in Saudi
Arabia, where wearing a veil is required of females. What does this imply, and does it complicate her prior narrative?
8.
At the end of her article she widens her lens by discussing the veil in Saudi Arabia, Syria and Turkey. She states that “forcing women to veil or unveil usually has the opposite effect.” The Pew foundation recently conducted a survey of attitudes to female clothing in a range of Muslim countries (see the chart). How might we connect this to Haydar’s text? http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/08/what-is-appropriate-attire-for-women-in-muslimcountries/
6

1.
What questions does Abu-Lughod seem to be asking? How are they similar to Haydar’s questions? In what ways are they different?
2.
What terms does Abu-Lughod use frequently? Which ones are similar to terms that Haydar uses?
Which ones are different? What does this suggest to you about what is important to Haydar’s audience? Abu-Lughod’s audience?
Reading Questions: Comparing Strategies in Abu-Lughod and Haydar
1.
Abu-Lughod’s text is significantly longer than Haydar’s. Why do you think this is so?
2.
Abu-Lughod’s tone is quite different from Haydar’s. What would you say the difference is? Locate one place in each text that you think is a good example, and explain how those places differ in tone.
3.
Examine the evidence used in Haydar’s text. How is it different from the kind of evidence used by Abu-
Lughod? What does this suggest to you about the expectations of Abu-Lughod’s audience?
4.
How do Haydar and Abu-Lughod deal with potential objections to their positions? Do they seem to expect their audiences to share those objections? What are the reasons they dismiss those objections, and what ideas or values will the audience need to share in order to agree with those reasons?
5.
How does Abu-Lughod present herself as an author? What does she do to demonstrate that she is knowledgeable and fair-minded? What expectations does she seem to think her audience will have about what makes an author credible? What does she do to present herself as an individual – a person with her own life experiences and individuality? What does she tell us about herself, and what expectations does this give you about what her audience would expect? In what ways does Abu-
Lughod’s presentation of herself differ from Haydar’s? How are they similar? What do these similarities and differences suggest to you about the expectations of their different audiences?
7

Call roll
Set up (a mix of instructor lecturing and short answers from students based on the pre-reading assignment)
Arguments arise out of questions – arguable situations
Pre-reading question was: What is Haydar’s question? Write potential questions on board.
Arguments differ from opinions in that they are based on evidence.
What are some kinds of evidence? List on board.
Will probably get some version of:
Numerical (including statistics)
Experimental/Research Study results/observations
Historical and current events and examples
Individual examples
Physical evidence
Expert testimony
Personal anecdotes
Masquerading as evidence:
Hypotheticals
“Common sense” statements
Bandwagon
Generalizations
Pre-reading question was: What kinds of evidence does Haydar seem to use? Write on board
What kinds of evidence doesn’t she seem to use much? Write on board.
Main question isn’t always answered director by evidence.
Evidence directs audience to reasons that lead up to a main answer.
Activity for day:
Have groups of three go through the text, identifying every piece of evidence and deciding how that evidence helps us see a particular claim that is related to the main question.
When groups have surveyed all the evidence, they should decide what the main claim is – the answer to the big overarching question.
Have groups look at handout for what makes evidence persuasive and evaluate the effectiveness of three pieces of evidence.
Evaluating evidence for effectiveness and ethics:
1.
is the evidence actually evidence, and what type?
2.
is the evidence relevant to the subclaim being supported? How so?
3.
Is the evidence relevant to the main argument?
4.
Would the target audience consider the evidence specific?
5.
Would the target audience consider sufficient detail provided?
6.
Would the target audience consider the source reliable?
8

7.
Would the target audience consider the evidence current, relative to the time in which the piece was written?
8.
Would the target audience consider the evidence accurate?
9.
Would the target audience the evidence representative?
10.
Would the target audience consider the evidence sufficient?
11.
Are there alternative interpretations to the evidence that are not given?
Group discussion:
Have groups report. Come to decision on main claim, reasons, and what evidence relates to what reason. Have groups report on how effective they found the evidence – whom do they think would find this evidence persuasive? Who would be unpersuaded by this evidence?
In “Veiled Threats?” and “Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering.” Lila Abu-
Lughod and Maysan Haydar each make arguments about the dress codes adopted by many Muslim women. Both authors support the practice of “covering,” in which clothing is worn to protect the wearer’s modesty. However, Haydar and Abu-Lughod’s arguments are constructed in very different ways.
In this paper you will identify what you see as the most interesting and important claims made by both authors. You will evaluate how effectively these authors use particular types of evidence and other rhetorical strategies to persuade their intended audiences.
You should also identify what you see as the intended audience for each of these texts, analyzing ways in which each author seems to be responding to different values and assumptions their intended reader is likely to hold, and evaluating how effectively each author seems to respond to or make use of those beliefs (about women? About men? Religion? Civil rights?)
You should evaluate the texts in terms of their relative strengths and weaknesses, asking, for instance, if one of them uses a type of evidence or a specific rhetorical strategy better than the other. You may even want to give suggestions to one or both of the authors as to how to improve her text.
Part 1. Introduction (1-2 paragraphs)
1. Introduce the author and the rhetorical situation (context, audience, purpose, publication)
2. Describe the author’s main argument - what is she trying to get us to believe?
3. State the direction of your analysis and the steps you will take to get us there (“metadiscourse.”)
(E.g., “In my analysis of Diamond’s text I will examine X and show Y.”)
[5pts]
Part 2. The Body, in which you present your central analysis
In this section, you will analyze 3 or 4 major claims that support the author’s argument. For each claim, you will:
 Identify the claim in your own words.
 Use a quotation to illustrate this claim. Introduce, integrate and explain the quotation (see Graff et al,. 39 – 49).
9



Identify the evidence the author presents to support this claim (if present/relevant)
Identify a strategy, move, or some aspect of the style/organization/use of evidence, and discuss how this supports the claim/argument. [70 POINTS]
Part 3: Your conclusion, which tells us “So What?” (2-3 paragraphs)
In this section, you will discuss issues of significance or effectiveness. There are several things you can choose to emphasize in this section.
 What is the significance of the argument – why does it matter (at this moment/to you/in general)?
 Has the author impacted your thinking/views on this topic? If so, in what way?
 Consider the effectiveness of the argument – focus on a key strength or weaknesses [15pts]
Remember to focus on the text’s argument and how it is constructed, not merely what it is about.
Write the paper as if you are addressing an audience that has not read the text, and thus requires that you “spell things out.” Use MLA format, proofread your work carefully, and revise, revise, revise.
10

OPTION 1
Intro
1. Start with overview of issue and why it matters/hook for reader.
2. Intro Haydar, and Abu-Lughod, explain rhetorical situations and overall arguments. Reference the contexts (1).
3. Metadiscourse section – describe what the paper will do.
Body
4. Describe central claims of each author.
5. Comparative analysis of an element of the argument and how it advances the claims/persuades
(evidence, appeals, rebuttals, strategies, etc.) If relevant, include consideration of context (2).
6. Evaluation of some of the strengths and weaknesses of the element (can be relative to context (3)).
Conclusion
7. Significance : so what/who cares? Reflection : what you learned writing this paper. Contribution : your own contribution to the discussion or to the claims of one of the author’s. This can include suggested improvements to an author’s argument.
OPTION 2:
Intro
Start with overview of issue and why it matters/hook. Metadiscourse section - what paper will do.
Body 1
2. Intro Haydar, explain rhetorical situation. Explore context (1).
3. Describe Haydar’s overall argument and central claims.
4. Analyze some elements of how those claims are advanced - evidence, appeals, rebuttals, strategies, etc.
Try to include consideration of context (2).
5. Evaluation of this.
Body 2
6. Intro Abu-Lughod, explain rhetorical situation. Explore context (1).
7. Describe overall argument, central claims.
8. Analyze some elements of how those claims are advanced - evidence, appeals, rebuttals, strategies, etc.
Try to include consideration of context (2).
9. Comparative evaluation of this element.
Conclusion
10. Significance : so what/who cares? Reflection : what you learned writing this paper. Contribution : your own contribution to the discussion or to the claims of one of the author’s. This can include suggested improvements to an author’s argument.
11

Writer’s Questions: What questions about your draft do you most want feedback on from your reader at this point?
Reader’s Questions:
Does the introduction include an overview of the issue or “hook” for the reader? Does it introduce Haydar and
Abu-Lughod’s texts, projects, overall argument, intended audiences, and the context? Does it include a
“metadiscourse” section stating what the paper will do?
How does the writer examine some of Haydar’s central claims? How does the writer identify and analyze the types of evidence that support these claims? (Is there anything the author could do to improve this?)
Are the claims the author identifies actually worded as claims? Remember, a claim is an arguable statement, not just a topic.
How does the writer examine some of Abu-Lughod’s central claims? How does the writer identify and analyze the types of evidence that support these claims? (Is there anything the author could do to improve this?)
How does the writer analyze the way in which Haydar responds to her audience’s values and assumptions?
How does the writer analyze the way in which Abu-Lughod responds to her audience’s values and assumptions?
How does the writer analyze the strengths and weaknesses of Haydar and Abu-Lughod’s claims? How does the writer compare the two authors? Is there anything the author could do to improve this?
Does the writer’s conclusion do one of the following: offer suggestions to improve Haydar and Abu-Lughod’s argument; answer the question, so what/who cares? Reflect on what was learned writing this paper; present a contribution to the discussion? Suggest possible additions/improvements.
Is there a place where there needs to be more analysis, interpretation, or connection by the writer? Where specifically?
Does the writer use quotations effectively? Are they relevant? Are they accurate? Are the cited correctly? Does your peer introduce, integrate and explain the quotes sufficiently? Provide suggestions.
Does the works cited page look correct? Is the paper’s heading in MLA format? Is it double-spaced throughout?
Are there any passages where you as a reader had trouble understanding? Be specific.
12

Notes below from TA discussion and from some links to material found on net (provenance unclear).
“Veiled Intentions” appeared in Body Outlaws: Rewriting the Rules of Beauty and Body Image (2003), edited by
Ophira Edut. Body Outlaws: Rewriting the Rules of Beauty and Body Image.
“Body Outlaws offers stories by those who have chosen to ignore, subvert, or redefine the dominant beauty standard in order to feel at home in their bodies.” (FROM ignored groups – minorities.)
The founding publisher of HUES ( Hear Us Emerging Sisters) magazine
Edut is a social worker who lives in NY, and has written for many publications, including the Nation & Spin magazine.
PURPOSE
Context – 2003. Not long after 9-11. Debates about veils and Muslim dress.
Book about challenging body and beauty stereotypes.
Purpose The author clearly wants to challenge assumptions about Muslim women [262a] and why many wear the veil.
MAJOR CLAIM The veil is a positive, affirmative choice for many Muslim women because it can reduce objectification, promote authentic relationships between men and women, and foster some important kinds of freedom. As she puts it, the veil can be “feminist, forward thinking, and progressive.” [AT THE HEART OF MY
VEILING IS PERSONAL FREEDOM.” Last sentence]
CLAIM The veil can help women avoid many damaging experiences, and help foster authentic relationships that are not primarily about looks and sex appeal. [260b]
EVIDENCE: her experiences at school; construction sites;
Qualification: “Of course, girls deserve to be treated with respect no matter what they wear. But since we live in a world of mixed messages, I got to bypass a lot of damaging experiences.” [260b]
Claim: Many people in the U.S. hold mistaken assumptions about the veil and Muslim women.
The veil does not mean you have to be conservative, passive, or traditional. The author is a feminist who likes heavy metal and piercings, and is married to a white catholic.
Evidence: her many examples in which she confounds stereotypes (like karate and skateboarding [260b])
CLAIM: There are many different reasons for wearing he veil, and many different interpretations of modesty.
[263b]
CLAIM Western cultural values are “out of line” – American women get dressed up for strangers not intimates; they place too much value on body image alone
Evidence: 260a; 262b
Rebuttals: [262a and 262b
You might assume that because Muslim women traditionally don’t display our bodies, we don’t hold them as important or feel connected to them—or that we don’t value ourselves as human beings. Guess again. While our degree of modesty is high, the value Muslim women place on their bodies underneath our veils is higher. In
13

Sunday school, girls are taught that our bodies are beautiful (“God is beautiful and loves beauty” is a hadith, or saying, of the prophet Muhammad) and that they’re so valuable that they’re only meant to be shared in an intimate relationship: husband and wife, mother and baby, among women, and in clinical or safe places (for example, with your doctor, among family members).
Rebuttal: [263b] “It’s utopic and ridiculous to assert that looks don’t matter and that by veiling I’m avoiding the messiness—particularly after September 11th.
It frees her, whereas she thinks Western norms do not free women, and in fact imprison them.
Women wear the veil for many different reasons
It is unfortunate that many Americans see veiling as an oppressive tool forced on women by men. [260a]
For many, covering hear and body is a choice, and this is true for women of many religions, not just Muslims.
Ethos – self-aware, reasonable, cosmopolitan, but someone who is free spirited and a little mischievous (“I grew to enoy their disbelief and shock.” [260b]
She will let her daughter do what she wants; she is against forcing women to veil, or requiring them.
She talks of the “contradictions” of her life.
She “didn’t watch boys and girls learn about watch other from the sidelines” [260b]
STRATEGY - connect her experience to those of other outsiders
“Like anyone else who’s visibly different from the norm, I encountered ridiculous ideas about what a covered person should be, do, and enjoy.”
STRATEGIES – CHALLENGE STEROTYOPES – she embodies qualities assumed not to belong together. WE
ARE NOT SO DIFFERENT – e.g. 263b:
STRATEGY - ENACTS contradictions – New York freed her, but exemplified what was wrong with image obsessed society. Wanted veil for silly reason, but now values it. Girl on train talked of freedom, but seemed oppressed by need to dress certain way.
CRITICAL QUESTIONS – seems to just accept that in Saudi Arabia you wear a full covering in order to adapt.
You just adapt there. In U.S., you also adapt. But makes little distinction between kinds of adaptation.
THIS IS PERSONAL NARRAVIE – a lot depends on reader being drawn into, identifying, or sympathizing with the narrator’s. ALSO – ability to tell stories that engage the reader.
14

Reflection Questions
1. How does Haydar relate the term “oppressive,” usually associated with the dress of Muslim women, to the dress of women in North American society? Do you agree with this parallel of various “freedoms”? Why or why not?
2. Haydar writes in her essay that while she did not choose her hobbies in order to get surprise reactions, she did enjoy the shocked looks on people’s faces when she revealed her interest in skateboarding and heavy metal, for example. Many people get excitement from overturning stereotypes about themselves, yet we continually use stereotypes and social expectations to understand our world. Can you think of a time when you
“surprised” someone by bucking the expectations they had for you? Was this an enjoyable experience? Why or why not?
3. List the advantages and disadvantages that Haydar associates with covering.
Do you agree that her hijab enables her “to be seen as a whole person” (para. 6)? Why or why not?
4. Haydar begins her essay by quoting two passages from the Quran. What rhetorical purpose do you think this move serves? Is including these quotes appropriate given the subject at hand? What does this rhetorical move tell you about who Haydar sees as her primary audience?
This is a fun, straightforward essay that students will most definitely enjoy discussing. Haydar’s voice is inviting; she earns our trust immediately, then presents an argument we may not have ever heard: a defense of covering from a Muslim woman’s point of view. Before reading the essay, you may want to have students write or talk about their preconceived notions concerning covering. When they see a Muslim woman who is covered, do they think of oppression or modesty? Choice or coercion?
Haydar argues that covering makes people, particular men, treat her with respect, essentially because they
are not judging her solely on her looks (question 1). Thus, as a teenager, her friendships weren’t muddied by a lot of sexual tension. Her hijab told them that she was not available and thus could be taken seriously.
The downside to covering is that, especially in a post–9/11 climate, people assume that she is a radical, a terrorist, or at the very least, someone to be pitied for her lack of rights in an oppressive culture. You may want to transition into question 3 at this point. Do your students agree on what constitutes modest or immodest dress? How is the dress of Muslim women the same or different than, say, Pentecostal women who wear long-sleeved blouses and ankle-length skirts, and who don’t cut their hair?
Is modest dress an integral part of religiosity, as Haydar implies in paragraph 7? Can one be religious and dress immodestly? Why or why not?
Question 4 asks about one of the most provocative moments of the essay. You may
15

want to have your students brainstorm about all the rituals they perform in order to be “masculine” and
“feminine.” Likewise, you could ask the women what rituals they expect men to perform, and vice versa. Do your students ever feel confined by these rituals? Have any of the women ever rejected some or all of them, such a wearing makeup, shaving legs and underarms, wearing deodorant, dressing in a feminine way? Have any of the men started wearing makeup or shaving their legs and underarms? Have they ever worn or thought of wearing a dress or skirt? Some of your more adventurous students may be willing to participate in an experiment of rejecting cultural norms and writing about it. They might incorporate this experience into a research paper, in which they discuss what’s expected, describe reactions to the unexpected, and suggest ways for cultural change.
Question 5 could be used as an opportunity to discuss male-female relations in general. Have your students debate Haydar’s assertion, “girls deserve to be treated with respect no matter what they wear (para. 11).” Do your students agree or disagree? Do they feel scantily clad women invite negative attention? Why or why not?
What can we do as a society to foster respect toward women? Does the change need to come from within men, women, or both?
If some or all of your students’ dress is already on the conservative side, they may choose to write about how their lives would change if they chose to dress immodestly or otherwise outlandlishly. Again, the survey in question 9 could be expanded to gauge attitudes toward several styles of dress. To what extent do the student body and the community judge a book by its cover? Students can write up their results and present them to the class.
Every article or essay has a purpose, and every author does their best to forward their purpose through the use of rhetorical devices, usually in the form of appeals to a variety of the reader's sensibilities. Maysan Haydar's essay,
Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Coverings is no different. She addresses the American people in an effort to convince them that what we perceive as oppression of women may, in fact, be no more than a different way of viewing beauty. She effectively employs appeals to logic, as well as an appeal to authority to convince the reader of this.
Haydar uses many tools to achieve her purpose, but perhaps the most effective is her use of examples to show how coverings are freeing, as opposed to confining. She relates various incidents, such as walking past a construction sites, and shows how these are no longer threatening because of her modest dressing style. While construction workers still comment on her as she walks past, she usually gets comments along the lines of "nice skirt," which she feels is "harmless compared to the degradations [she] usually hears women complain about."
She also gives an account of a girl on a subway who wonders at Haydar's coverings, remarking "Me, I gotta be free." Haydar then comments on the confining and restrictive nature of the girl's choice of modern clothing.
Haydar tells the reader that the girls' tight pants, excessive makeup, and complex hairdo seem more confining than the traditional veil Haydar wears.
Haydar also uses an appeal to the emotions of the reader to get her point across. Everyone remembers high school, and how weird it suddenly became to deal with members of the opposite sex. Haydar points out that, instead of alienating her, her jilbab allowed her to interact with boys on a purely platonic level. This may not have been the case in all relationships, but she tells us that she was liked for who she was, beyond her body. By using examples that ring a common chord among her readers, she gives us reasons that we feel and sympathize with, instead of merely understanding.
The final tool that Haydar uses to convince us of her viewpoint is that of credibility. She uses verses from the
Quran, the Muslim holy book, to support her points and convince us that she knows the religious reasons behind
16

her decisions. The article starts with two verses telling women to cover themselves, so that their beauty might be hidden. She later tells us how much physical beauty is valued by Muslim society, "In Sunday school, girls are taught that our bodies are beautiful [. . .] and that they’re so valuable that they’re only meant to be shared in an intimate relationship." By comparison, Haydar tells the reader that "Western priorities are out of line: American women spend hours getting ready for strangers to see them but don’t give the same effort to those who see them in intimate settings."
Haydar's essay is an important piece of literature for the American populace. It is a view on Muslim ideas of modesty from a Muslim perspective. It causes the reader to re-think their views about Muslim society, and rethink their views about Western society as well. It effectively uses appeals to logic, emotions, as well as the reader’s sense of authority. Her well placed examples of various forms of freedom, along with her clearly stated authority on the subject, and her appeal to the reader’s memories of relationship insecurities in middle and high school all combine effectively to form a convincing essay on the subtle freedom behind the veil.
17