07 Jul If a girl wears Hijab at 9, isn’t that sexualization? [I disagree] Part 2
If a girl wears Hijab at 9, isn’t that sexualization? [I disagree] Part 2
The American government does not mandate that I participate in a beauty pageant. The Iranian government does mandate that little girls wear a hijab (and really, you could have just Googled it. It’s perfectly true). That’s a serious difference. You ask why Iran and Saudi Arabia are held up litmus tests. That’s simple: they declare that they are the litmus test. They say it. They declare the truth of their Islamic regimes. And sorry, one blogger’s more reasonable opinion is nothing to that power.
Thank you for your comment, and for your concern, and I hope that you do not take offense with the tone of my subsequent replies, and furthermore, realize, that my histrionics are a personal quirk which I hope you find endearing, rather than a source of antagonism. I mean no harm or offense by my tone, and if I offend you, please accept my sincerest apologies.
Yes, you are correct, the American Government does not mandate that. However, the Canadian Government is in the process of making it illegal for a woman to cover her face while taking her oath of allegiance. The French Government has made Niqab an illegal offense. The French Government does not let French Citizens attend school with their headscarf.
I honestly see no distinction between the actions of those governments and of Saudia Arabia and Iran.
Furthermore, if you took the time to read my opinions, I have said, upon numerous occasions, that not only is the issue of Hijab something that should be decided and put into place on the terms of the only people effected: women, but also, that I do not hold any position on whether Hijab is mandatory or not, and following my aforementioned position, I defer to women’s judgment.
I have also said, that from a simple perspective of Shariah, a state should not legislate the Hijab on a state-wide basis. Why is that?
Let us assume our goal is to foster an environment which would greatly incentivize women to wear the Hijab. Okay?
Statistics show, that when a government forces women to wear Hijab, they can’t stand it. They also show us, that when a government restricts the Hijab (as well as Niqab) that women greatly favor it.
So, since the Shariah is designed and directed towards the effective, which is governed by Al-Maqasid Al-Shariah, which is a term describing the discipline of pursuing the Purpose/Function of Shariah, it means we have to choose a legislative course that would fulfill our stated goal. Therefore, if we were to enact legislation, then making it mandatory would defeat the purpose, making it illegal would be weird, therefore, the classical position of Shariah would be for the state to be silent on the matter.
Why would I say such a thing? Because, once you need law to solve an issue of morality, you have an issue that law cannot solve.
Now, historically, you could argue that the reason why the Islamic State would not make Hijab mandatory VIA THE LAW [note: If you send me a comment and disregard these three bolded, capitalized words, I will not respond] was that prior to the advent of the modern nation state, the state did not have the power in order to enforce such laws, and even if it did have such powers, it would be directed towards greater tax collection and other issues, since hijab was not an issue for the historical Islamic States.
Whatever the case maybe, the simple fact stays the same, both Iran and Saudi Arabia, by enacting these sorts of legislation are creating new forms of policies that do not square away with the history of Shariah. Again, the above paragraph (and subsequent argument) offers, in my mind, the biggest possible reason why, but regardless, it still stands that these legislated modes of enforcing the Hijab are new.
Furthermore, in regards to the idea that Saudi Arabia or Iran declares that they are the litmus test, I am unsure of that. If I am being cynical, Iran, as a country that is predominantly Shia, would not be the best “litmus test” for the Muslim population, which is approximately 80% Sunni. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, may purport itself to be, but Saudi Arabia’s place has more to do with the geographic reality of Mecca and Medina being within the state’s borders. In fact, the center piece of the King’s legitimacy is predicated on his protection and custodianship of the Two Mosques, which is distinct to other Arab Kings, like those of Jordan or Morocco, who both base their legitimacy in their shared lineage with The Prophet Muhammad.
Furthermore, Saudi Arabia is not even the leader of the Arab World, let alone the Muslim World, and considering the fact that the leader of Sunni Islam is Sheikh Al-Azhar, who is the rector of Al-Azhar University, which is based in Egypt, it just casts further doubt on your positions that Saudi Arabia is somehow the essence of, as you said, “Islamic regimes.”
When we look at the practical side of the law, both nations, while purporting to have “Shariah law,” in truth, really only Iran possesses a system that can even have a shout at a claim of such a system. Saudi Arabia’s system is an odd mixture of Western codes dressed up in religious language, where there is more tribal infused characteristics, which is especially true when you contrast the judicial history of the more, shall we say… diverse, region of Hejaz, versus the rest of the country.
Iran, is far trickier, because there is the issue of Wilyat-al-Faqih. Take Grand Ayatollah Sistani, who does not agree with that concept, and so, even within Shia Scholarship, you have a disagreement over the nature of the state itself, and the role of clerics therein.
Finally, I think if you’ll ask many Muslims, you’ll realize that while Iran may be important to many Muslims (for various reasons), Saudi Arabia seldom evokes the same sort of allegiance, and is generally the source of embarrassment, as well as a sort of “contrast” to the less Bedouin Arab societies of the Levant, Iraq, and Egypt, which are home to the historical centers of Arab and Muslim culture: Damascus/Beirut, Baghdad, and Cairo.
In sum, I think you may have some mistaken assumptions, and frankly speaking, while I may be merely a blogger, even if what you say is true, then perhaps it will be my modest opinion that could lead to the reform that is required. It might not be the reform that people outside would like to see, but they do not have that right, because it is our right to have our progress on our terms.
Insha Allah, I hope you understand that desire on our part, and I hope that if you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to message me, and I hope that this reaches you and your family in the best of health and Iman.