Alana
Brady
Professor
Werry
RWS200
February
18, 14
Veiled Arguments
Every country has different beliefs,
religions, practices, and ways of living their lives. Not only do religions
have their own way of teachings but they also have customs rules that can seem
outrageous to others. It is tradition for Muslim women to cover themselves as a
way of showing respect and honor for their religious beliefs. In some
countries, they want to ban Muslim women from covering themselves and restrict
them from their representation of their culture. In the texts “Veiled
Intentions: Don’t Judge a Girl by Her Covering”, by Maysan Haydar, Hadaar argue
that Muslim women should be treated with equal respect and shouldn’t be
prevented from showing off who they really are. In the text “Veiled Threats?” by Martha Nussbaum,
Nussbaum discusses the five arguments that are commonly made in favor of
proposed bans. Both writers approach their audience in two different ways.
Haydar, who is a contributor to Body
Outlaws: Rewriting the Rules of Beauty and Body Image approaches her
audience by talking about her personal experience as a veiled Muslim where Nussbaum,
who is an author of several books and teaches law, philosophy, and divinity at
the University of Chicago approaches her audience by stating facts and
logistics on the reasoning for veiled Muslim women. In this paper, I will talk
about both Hadar and Nussbaum’s main arguments and claims, strengths and
weaknesses, and how they approach their audience.
In the first text, “Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Girl by Her Covering” by Maysan
Haydar, Hayar wants the audience to get a good understanding of her side as a
veiled Muslim women. In her text she talks about her personal experiences and
reasoning for following her religion’s standard of modesty and appearance. Ever
since Hayar was twelve years old, she has been covering herself showing her
respect an honor towards her culture. As the rest of society believes being
veiled is negative, Hayar argues that her choice of covering herself is a sign
of freedom. She believes that the choice of wearing loads of makeup,
complicated hairstyles, and tight jeans are signs of caging. In her eyes, you
don’t have to get plastic surgery, stay skinny, and change who you are for
people to respect you. Hadar feels like she has freedom showing off who she
truly is, a proud Muslim woman. Wearing her veil out in public, honoring and
respecting her traditions, and doing this as a choice shows that Hadar is having
a consciousness of her own dignity.
Hadar was very successful for getting her
point across in a clear and appropriate way. In order for her to persuade her
audience, she uses her own personal, life stories. Hadar connects with the
readers by using pathos as her strategy. Although she wants her audience to
feel for her, she doesn’t have many facts and statistics to back up her claims,
which might have her readers question her statements altogether. When it comes
to evidence, she talks about how living United States, she gets to choose
whether to wear a veil or not, proving to the audience that is it not a force
to be veiled. She has many strengths in her text that really catches the
reader’s attention. When she states, “I've been covering my hair, as is
prescribed for Muslim women, since I was twelve years old. And while there are
many good reasons for doing so, I wasn't motivated by a desire to be different,
to honor tradition, or to make a political statement”. Haydar is trying to
express how she enjoys being covered and that she isn’t being forced because it
is a part of her religious tradition. Most people assume that all Muslim women
dread being veiled, when really that’s not the case according to Haydar. When
she says, “I embrace the veil's modesty, which allows me to be seen as a whole
person instead of a twenty-piece chicken dinner”, she wants the audience to
realize that it is better to be covered than wearing skimpy clothes. She
believes it is unfortunate for the people who don’t respect themselves rather
than the people who do. “In Sunclay School, girls are taught that our bodies
are beautiful”. Most people say the Muslim traditions want to keep to women
from appreciating their bodies, when they really were taught to love what they
look like. Although Haydar has many strong points, she also has week assertions
that are some what hypocritical. In her reading, she is speaking only among
herself and not in representation for all Muslim women. Even though she may
honor and respect being veiled, not all women feel that way. She doesn’t really
have any facts to back up her statements and thoughts. Haydar uses a lot of “I”
rather than “we”, which makes me question if other Muslim women feel the same
way as her. Haydar also uses quotes that don’t indicate who is saying them. She
uses mostly pathos instead of logos and ethos so her appeals and rebuttals come
off as very week.
In the second text, “Veiled Threats?” by Martha Nussbaum,
Nussbaum questions what is it to treat people with equal respect in areas
touching on religious belief and observance, specifically in Muslim woman. Just
like Democracy over Republic, Nussbaum believes that the minority of Muslims is
not being treated equally to the majority of society. She refers to the 17th-centery
English philosopher, John Lock who states the law that there should be no
penalization against religious beliefs. Although she supports that law, today
European countries are trying to ban burqas, which Nussbaum argues. Nussbaum
supports her claims by covering the five arguments that are commonly made in favor
of proposed bans. She points out that people believe Muslim women should be
banned from covering their faces in public, yet society today can wear scarves
covering their faces during the cold. She also states that women may cover
their bodies as a way of being objective to males, but the rest of the women
get plastic surgery, wear tight attire, and pose in nude photos for men.
Nussbaum feels that society is being hypocritical because they judge Muslim
women for respecting their religious beliefs.
In order for Nussbaum to persuade her
audience to agree with her arguments, she uses logos and ethos as her
strategies. Since Nussbaum is an author of several books and teaches law,
philosophy, and divinity at the University of Chicago, people are more
susceptible to believing what she argues is legitimate. Also, she uses a lot of
facts and resources to back up her statements. She uses a lot of rebuttals by
fighting the public view on veiled women. Although that is a good thing to have
proof, Nussbaum comes off very intimidating and a “know it all”, which loses
the audiences interest in her text. To go further into Nussbaum reading, I would like to point out the strengths
and weaknesses of her text. Nussbaum was vey successful with making her arguments very
clear and structured. When she pointed out the five arguments that are commonly
made in favor of proposed bans, one of the arguments caught my attention. In
the third argument when Nussbaum talks about how Muslim women are seen by
society as mere objects, she claims that they are quite opposite of that.
Nussbaum states, “Sex magazines, nude photos, tight jeans- all of these
products, treat women as objects”. She is pointing out to society that women
who are covered receive respect from men not women who present themselves seductively.
Although she does make a strong claim, the down side to that is not all people
may agree with her statement. Just because some women may wear less clothing
doesn’t mean men don’t take them as serious. Nussbaum is making more of a
personal opinion rather than a fact. Even though the third argument may be
offensive to Nussbaum culture, she doesn’t realize that her argument can be
insulting towards other women as well. Another one of the five arguments that
are commonly made in favor of proposed bans caught my attention as well. The
fourth holds that women wear the burqa only because they are coerced. Nussbaum
questions if the arguers really believe domestic violence is particularly a
Muslim problem. She uses logos to back up her statement by referring to The
National Violence Against Women Survey, which is strong so the reader can get a
clear understanding of her claim. The result of the survey reports that, “52
percent of surveyed women said they were physically assaulted as a child by an
adult caretaker and/or as an adult by any type of perpetrator”. Nussbaum argues
that there is no evidence that those come from Muslim families. Yes, that is
true, but she also doesn’t have any evidence that they don’t come from Muslim
families. I do like where she was going with her argument, but when she didn’t
use logos to back up her other claim, that’s when I questioned her statements
all together.
Looking back at the 9/11
terrorist attack, many people saw Muslims as a threat. Still to this day people
struggle to make peace and continue to create tension with anyone who practices
the Muslim traditions. The significance of this is that anyone who reads these two
texts gets to see a personal and political side to veiled Muslim women and
people who are against that can get a better understanding about them. For what
I have learned, I used to think that being veiled is a force and not a choice.
I now see a completely different side to the argument, which makes me respect
veiled women on a higher level. Although I agree with Nussbaum political argument, I feel that
she was very intimidating, stating numerous facts and logics not using any
pathos. Also, when she brings up the five arguments that are commonly made in
favor of proposed bans, her arguments are a little week and irrelevant, which
makes me questions her claims. Overall I think that both writers were
successful with making their arguments clear and understanding.
