|
There is a distinctive difference between non-Islamic (which we will refer to here as "Western," though this is another debate) and Islamic dress codes. Western clothes are usually descriptive of a woman's body or at least parts of it, whereas Islamic dress permits the exposure of only a woman's hand and face. All clothes that are not transparent, do not visually define the body, and show only the woman's face and hands are dubbed Islamic.
Prehistoric Simple
Some scientists date the history of humans on earth to millions of years ago, when humans went naked. Covering the body then is a comparatively recent development in comparison to a level of nudity. Wearing clothes was equated with realizing the realms of the physique and becoming civilized.
The question then is, who is more reactionary? Are they those who seem to be returning to a primitive past? According to critics of Muslims, Muslims are "backward," added to which is a stream of negative adjectives, like fundamentalist and radical. But what if we consider time as the correct measure to differentiate between who is progressive and who is not?
If we look at times before Islam, we find that the daughters of Arab tribe leaders wore clothes that covered their bodies to a great extent in contrast to slave girls who wore a lot less, being commodities of the sex trade. As for the daughters of grand families, their bodies were not for sale, and so it was not wise to have their bodies on display. They had to be special and different from the slaves, so that everyone knows they are free women.
Today's Slave Trade
|
.
|
Revealing the body for the sake of trade — now commonly referred to as "business" — still exists in our modern times. A woman who does such work does not have the freedom to cover her body during work hours, which means that her freedom is curbed in this duration. When it is time to return her freedom back to her, she puts on her clothes, covering her body, and then leaves.
Covering the body then or revealing parts of it is not necessarily expressive of freedom or civilization or progress. Likewise, covering the body is not a limit of freedom as some claim. The sex trade in our times is another proof — more modern and obvious — of that when a woman is truly denied her liberty, she is more prone to exposure, and the first violation of her rights is against the sanctity of her body and her right to preserve it.
All this is not meant to be an insult to women who wear Western clothes. It is also not an attempt to describe them as being backward or not free as some of them have done to veiled Muslim women. But if we use time as a criterion, the contemporary Western dress code predates the Islamic one.
The AUC and Niqab
The BBC News website published comments on the court ruling that denied the American University in Cairo (AUC) the right to prevent young ladies wearing niqab (face veil) from entering the university. Opposing viewpoints echoed the same reasons: Some men may use the veil to penetrate the security of the "targeted" university; niqab hinders communication; and the appearance of a young lady wearing niqab hurts the feelings of professors and some students.
To me, all these arguments are unconvincing. A female security guard at the gates can so easily ask a veiled woman to show her face to make sure that she is a woman, a student, or a friend accompanying a student (if visitors are allowed).
The main objective of a university is to teach knowledge. There is a considerable number of female students and university professors who wear the veil and can still learn and teach. For the issue of communication, the question is: Is it hindering communication with professors and colleagues? They have good relations and communicate successfully with their colleagues and professors, even those who do not wear a headscarf. Thus, these arguments are not realistic.
If a young lady wearing niqab does not want to start mixed-gender dealings, that is her right. Logically, then a woman who chooses to expose certain parts of her body, then she is inviting attention - and that is her choice. But the latter does not have the right to control the choices of others or claim that she is more liberated and progressive.
For the delicate part of hurting feelings, in fact it reflects a lack of acceptance of "the other." As far as I know, there is no human instinct against modesty, but there is one that swells, revolts, and affects the brain and concentration because of what a woman shows of her charms. Which is more harmful to the educational process and the goal for which universities were established? I remember asking one of the AUC students — he was 19 then — about the most frustrating thing for him, and the surprise was him referring to "girls' hot clothes" and how they make him lose focus during lectures.
Sources:
Baran, Fatih. "Economic Plight Drives Prostitution in Turkey Accessed 9 Sep. 2007.
"Cairo Campus Veil Ban Struck Down." BBC NEWS. 10 June 2007. Accessed 9 Sep. 2007.
P.R.E. "In Order to understand Prostitution" Accessed 9 Sep. 2007.
|
