Some of Abu-Lughod’s Main Claims
Claim 1: The images we have of veiled Muslim women are problematic because they are A) limited (fail to
capture diversity and complexity, reducing our capacity to see Muslim women accurately) B) create a
false divide between "us" and "them," and C) can be used to justify military intervention.
Claim 2: We need to redefine how we see the burqa, and recognize it as liberating, enabling women to
move out of segregated spaces, and protecting them from harassment. It allows agency and freedom
(defined in terms of the local context) and is part of complex cultural traditions that women value.
Claim 3: We must beware pity. Pity positions Western feminists as “superior” saviors who speak for
Muslim women yet end up belittling and endangering local Muslim feminists.
Claim 4: We need to understand that there are different paths to social change, and for change to work it
must take people as they are, consider their context, and include their many desires.
Claim 5: To help Muslim women, we should work at home to make US and European policies more
humane, offer support in a more respectful way, and think in terms of alliances and solidarity, not
salvation and pity.
Sample Student Writing
Oppressing or liberating? There is a controversial debate among many Americans and those of the
Muslim faith over the idea of covering in public settings. Some people consider it to oppressing to the
women that chose to cover in public. In order to understand the complexity of this issue one must
understand the Muslim perspective. This can be achieved by examining two texts written by Muslim
women. The first is Veiled Intentions by Maysan Haydar, this reading is an overview of Haydar’s
experience and opinions on vailing published as light reading marketed towards young women. This work
shows a unique first person view on why a Muslim women veiled. The next work is The Muslim woman
by Lila Abu-Lughod. In this article Abu-Lughod collects examples in the American media and discusses
the American allusion of the muslin woman. It is published in Eurozine, a collection of Europe’s leading
cultural magazines. With the combination of these two texts the reader can begin to understand the Muslim
point of view as well as gleam incite on the American view of veiling. While both texts have a similar goal
they are written extremely differently, in this essay I will be discussing the author’s main arguments as well
as comparing the strategies used.
The first text I’m going to discuss is veiled intentions by Haydar. The main claims of this article is that the
veil helps her be seen as more of a person and as opposed to a “twenty piece dinner” by men. She supports
this claim with mainly her own experiences with men. She talks about how it spared her many damaging
experiences “since I knew I was being liked for who I was beyond my body”. She also claims that the veil
while helping her be seen for who she is does not change what she is like. Meaning that the veil has only
helped her. She uses examples in her own life of how she is just like a normal person by writing things like
“I’m married to a white man who was raised catholic, I love heavy metal, I consider myself a feminist, and
I sport a few well-disguised piercings.” She does this to show that the American ideal of a Muslim women
is miss informed and that veiled women are misrepresented in America. This is a similar point to what
Abu-Lughod tries to make in The Muslim woman. Abu first claims that the images the media uses in the
west have been bad for the Muslim image, or more specifically, “because of the deadening effect they have
on our capacity to appreciate the complexity and diversity of Muslim women’s lives- as human beings.”
She also claims that covering offers the luxury of portable seclusion. She supports this claims by
commenting on American media’s surprise over the lack of liberated women not throwing off their
veil. She pokes fun at the idea with the comment “Did we expect that once “free” from the Taliban they
would go “back” to belly shirts and blue jeans, or dust off their Chanel suits?” Both authors talk about the
American misconception with Muslim women. Haydar comments on this and compares her self to the
American misconceptions as she is very different, and Abu shows how the media is misrepresenting
Muslim women witch causes what Haydar is talking about.
Untitled
In today’s world, it is so difficult to show people different perspectives. Two authors, Haydar and AbuLughod offer readers the chance to view the veil in different contexts. This controversial topic of veiling
usually offers one sided prospects when in actuality it is quite diverse. Haydar is an American who grew up
in a Muslim community and who now resides in New York City. She is a writer for young women in
magazines and articles relevant to today’s topics and culture trends. Abu-Lughod however, grew up in the
Middle East, and now resides in the US. Her main audience is presumably highly educated as she
references multiple studies, books, and research, as well as opens her piece with an abstract. Both authors
want readers to view veiling in the different context than is the typical norm.
In Haydar’s article, she makes several claims. One of which, is that veiling allows women to avoid
damaging relationships with men, and helps promote confidence and modesty. Her evidence for this bold
claim, is her personal experiences growing up and creating friendships with males through high school.
Also, Haydar claims that Western ideals are fixated on the wrong things. Here she references how much
money is poured into cosmetic surgeries, makeup and beauty products. Abu-Lughod on the other hand,
approaches veiling and its useful purposes in a different light. I believe her biggest claim of all is that,
everything and every culture is relative. That each communities interpret things differently, have different
meanings and contexts. Her evidence that she offers, is that all these differences are socially constructed by
society. Without placing our own confines to other cultures, there would be no conflict or judgements
passed. She also claims that veiling is a choice. Unlike Haydar, Abu-Lughod provides factual evidence that
once strict Taliban regime was lifted, and women were free to not be confined to a burqa, they still chose to
wear one, because of their social context and more importantly, their choice. Both authors try to persuade
their audiences that veiling is not an awful tool of oppression. I believe Abu-Lughod is more successful
than Haydar in conveying that veiling is a practice of freedom. Abu-Lughod outlines clearly that there is a
them, and us complex. I think this is essential to understanding veiling from a reader who is not from a
culture that traditionally practices it. We come from various backgrounds and find different things and
experiences as the norm. Haydar, however comes off critical of those who take an hour to get ready in the
morning, or dress in tight clothing. She does not seem to take into account that as women, we dress and
style ourselves to please ourselves and only ourselves. She seems to think that her relationships are more
wholesome because of the cloth she wears around her head. She believes she gains more respect from
individuals of the opposite sex, when in reality, men should not be given a choice of whether to respect
someone based off of how they look. This fundamental factor makes me agree more with Abu-Lughod
rather than Haydar. Through and through, I will look at veiling in a whole new way from now on.
Maysan Haydar and Lila Abu-Lughod both talk about Muslim women and how the veil is portrayed in the
western world. Maysan Haydar is a Muslim feminist living in New York City. She is a social worker and,
her articles have been published in many different books. Haydar and Abu Lughod’s audience is western
women who are in their eyes unaware of the truth behind Muslim women’s veiling practices. Haydar
argues that the veil is worn by choice to show modesty, and to create meaningful relationships that are not
revolved around looks. She claims “many Americans see veiling as an oppressive tool forced on Muslim
women by the men in [their] culture” (Haydar 260), but in her opinion this is just an incorrect stereotype
created by western people. Abu Lughod is a professor at Columbia University in the anthropology
department. She questions whether Muslim woman are really oppressed, and if the images portrayed of
Middle Eastern women in western magazines and newspapers are representative of the entire population.
Haydar claims that Muslim women wear the veil to look modest and so they can have healthy relationships
not revolved around looks. She “embrace[s] the veils modesty, which allows [her] to be seen as a whole
person instead of a twenty-piece chicken dinner” (Haydar 259); this creates the assumption that women
who don’t wear the veil are not a whole person and are not appreciated for their personality only their
looks. Also, haydar infers that all men look at women as a piece of meat rather than a person, which
weakens her argument and may cause offence to some readers. Haydar uses a personal experience story to
back up her claim. She says “construction workers may feel obligated to say something to every passing
woman, but I often get things like “ I like your skirt!” or “girl, I would marry you!” harmless compared to
the degradation I’ve heard many women complain about” (Haydar 260). This evidence is weak because its
unrealistic to believe this happens to women every day, which causes the question; are these occasional
degrading comments significant enough to believe that we must all wear veils to be modest?