In Phyllis Chesler’s article “France is Brave and Right to Ban the Burqa,” Chesler uses several persuasive appeals to build her argument praising burqa bans. I will be providing a rhetorical analysis as well as a Toulmin analysis of this article.
In the article, Chesler uses several persuasive appeals in an attempt to convince readers to support France’s ban on head coverings. While some may argue that banning religious clothing infringes on Islamic law, Chesler points out that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” In an appeal to logos, Chesler uses facts, gathered from educated Muslim women and Islamic scholars, to show that this argument is illogical because the burqa is not required. Chesler continues logos appeals by citing the Sheikh of al-Azhat University as saying “The niqab is tradition. It has no connection to religion.” This passage demonstrates ethos as well, but carries on the idea that burqas and niqabs are not required by Islamic law, making the ban perfectly logical. The idea is that, since these garments are not mandatory in the Koran’s broad requisite of “modest dress,” the ban does not infringe on religious rights, making the ban a logical choice. Chesler takes the argument one step further by insisting that the burqa is not only optional, it is detrimental to wearers. The argument that “it is a human rights violation and constitutes both a health hazard and is a form of torture” to women who wear burqa exhibits both logos and pathos. By pointing out that burqas are a possible “health hazard,” Chesler uses unappealing syntax to make readers believe that burqas are unhealthy and i...
... middle of paper ...
...th her point of view. Dr. Hargey also pokes fun at Muslims by insinuating that clearly-thing Muslims will not oppose the ban. Another example of ethos is the passage first cited as a logical appeal—the statement that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” This passage, while mostly a logos appeal, subtly boosts Chesler’s credibility because practicing Muslim men and women recognize the burqas and niqabs are not required by the Koran. Because these men and women, simultaneously educated and religious, acknowledge that burqas are optional, readers can begin to support the argument, too, as it comes from reputable sources.
Chesler make many compelling persuasive arguments; however, a few logical fallacies appear in her line of thinking.
The article “My Body Is My Own Business” by Naheed Mustafa is about an Islamic women’s principle that putting on her usual headscarf, or Hijab, actually empowers her as a female, contrary to the popular principle that the hijab represents male oppressiveness. She ex...
For some women wearing a veil is not something that is forced on them but rather a choice of their own. Martha Nussbaum and Maysan Haydar are both authors that try to explain their reasoning that veiling isn't an oppressive tool used against women. Martha Nussbaum's article “Veiled Threats”, is a political and philosophical take on why banning the burqa is a violation of human rights. On the other hand Maysan Haydar’s article “Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering”, is a more humorous and personal take on why veiling shouldn't be as judged or stereotyped. Though Nussbaum and Haydar have equal goals this essay is being used to understand the main argument, claims and whether or not each article has any weaknesses.
Ever pass by Muslim woman in a hijab at the mall or park and think how oppressive and restraining her culture must be? Maysan Haydar, a New York social worker who practices the Muslim tradition of veiling, believes otherwise. In her article, “Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering,” Haydar highlights on her experiences as a Muslim living in an American culture, where showing more skin is the “norm.” Haydar speaks specifically to a crowd who unconsciously makes assumptions about certain Muslim practices, in hopes of sharing the truth behind them. Haydar suggests that, contrary to popular belief, not all Muslim women cover themselves strictly as an “oppressive” religious practice, but that some women, like herself, find
The documentary “Young, Muslim, and French” brings attention to the islamophobia that is going on in France. In September 2004, the French government passed a law banning religious paraphernalia in schools, especially targeting head scarfs. The government claims this was a way to “end extremism”. The school system believes that there is no place for religion in school, and around the young in their formative years. The veil is an expression of their devotion to Islam, not a symbol of terrorism. Not wearing it contradicts their religion and even jeopardizes their place in heaven, and puts a great amount of stress on Muslim students. Which results in the French education failing to properly teach and support these students. Muslim students are thrown off the education path and often study to become electricians and other technical careers. Girls are forced to choose between practicing their faith and receiving an education.
Muslims, Sikhs, and many other religious affiliations have often been targeted for hate crimes, racial slurs, and misfortunate events. We are all different in our own ways some are good and some are bad yet one event changes everything for everyone affiliated with the group. The book The Politics of the Veil by Joan Scott a renowned pioneer in gender studies gives a detailed and analytical book of about the French views towards the Muslim females in France during 2004. The author talks about why the French governments official embargo of wearing conspicuous signs is mainly towards the headscarves for Muslim girls under the age of eighteen in public schools. The main themes of book are gender inequality, sexism, and cultural inequality historical schools used in the book are history of below, woman’s history, cultural history, and political history. In this essay, I will talk about why Joan Scotts argument on why the French government’s ban on wearing conspicuous signs was
Many people have an issue when women wear hijab because they can't see all of their head. Fakhraie uses the strategy of ethos in her essay because women should be the ones saying if they should be allowed or not. The author explains how; " banning the hijab" (Fakhraie 461) is spreading all over the world.
Lee and George attacks the credibility of Thomson by disputing her argument with a logical
Professor Leila Ahmed, active Islamic feminist, in her article “Reinventing the veil” published in the Financial Times assumes that there is a connection between “advancement” and veiling, which means that unveiled women are advanced and vice versa. In addition, she supports that it led to increasing rate of violence. She questions why women wear veil, that is considered as “symbol of patriarchy and women’s oppression”. However, research changed her position towards wearing veil. Firstly, she states that wearing veil was essential for women, because it could be beneficial and influence to how people treat women, in terms of job, marriage and free movement in public. Secondly, her assumption was explained while interviewing women, who stated
One of Sultana Yusufali’s strongest arguments in “My body is my own business” is her scrutinization of the exploitation of female sexuality. Initially Yusufali writes about the injudicious individuals that assume she is oppressed by her hijab. Thereafter, she describes them as “brave individuals who have mustered the courage to ask me about the way I dress”. Moreover, Yusufali’s word choice is intriguing as she utilizes the word “brave” when laymen hear this word they habitually associate the aforementioned with heroic, valiant and courageous. Consequently, Yusufali ensues to comprise her opinions on the hijab and how it carries a number of negative connotations in western society. Furthermore, Yusufali proceeds to strike on the importance
One issue that has presented itself is when cultural relativists and the adversaries of universalism fail to recognize the contingency that Nussbaum writes about. Although universalists place all humans in one category with equal rights, they recognize the difference between the upbringings of individuals. It is helpful to look at certain practices through a cultural lens in an attempt to understand that practice, but it is also crucial to step back and view that same practice in order to discern whether it is morally right and just. Universalists do not aim to restrict cultural practices or activities unless those activities violate informed consent and the harm principle set forth by John Stuart Mill. Mill believes that an individual should have the liberty to do as he pleases, except when that act intentionally harms someone outside the scope of consenting practitioners. Another issue with universalism is when countries and individuals alike misconstrue it to mean conformity and sameness as opposed to what it truly is - equal rights and concern for all humans. In The Politics of the Veil, Joan Wallach Scott argues against the French’s decision to outlaw the veil. This decision may have been surrounded by less controversy if the French government provided a right of exit for those who feel oppressed by the veil and fear the consequences from the men of their family and community, as opposed to outlawing the practice as a whole. As mentioned above, the veil has provided a zone of comfort for many women for a long time. Although the original undertone of requiring women to wear the veil was the intent of demonstrating male domination, it has recently simply become a piece of clothing and a part of some women’s identity. In outlawing the veil, the French were appealing to their own ethnocentrism, and goals of assimilation and
In this excerpt, the burqa is described as “tight”, “heavy”, and “suffocating”, making it seem like an unpleasant garment to be ensconced in. The burqa can cause an “unnerving” feeling, which can make daily tasks hard to complete. When interviewing a girl in Afghanistan, Daniel Pipes, American historian, writer, and commentator, got her opinion on the burqa, “When I wear a burqa it gives me a really bad feeling. I don't like to wear it. I don't like it, it upsets me, I can't breathe properly.”
Most of these things it is possible to see through the analysis of the situation that exists in practice and analysis of several court cases. In France, for years women with Hijab encounter problems, both in education and in ...
299). The study consisted of having in-depth personal interviews to share their experiences of being a Muslim American woman (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 300). Veiling to these women was a way of freedom while also having a Muslim identity (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 301). It was also a source of behavior control, to not be sexually objectified, a way of commanding respect from others and even a source of checking their own behavior (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 301). One of the women interviewed said, veiling to her was a way to feel connected to other Muslim woman who veil (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 302). Veiling can be a way to feel connected to your religion and God as well as being connected to those who practice the same faith, it can be considered an act of membership. Many of the women interviewed noted they have been removed from planes, been treated unfairly, and have had strangers shout at them all for just being Muslim and being more visibly recognized from veiling (Anderson Droogsma, 2007, p. 303). This is an example of how media can affect the general population. When the media only shows radicals and compares all Muslims to being terrorist or dangerous they are actually putting Muslim people at risk of being assaulted in public. Muslim woman in particular are more at risk for being assaulted as they are more identifiable. So while veiling can be a source of empowerment and freedom for women it is a double-edged sword because it also puts them at further risk of being
Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis introduces the Islamic veil as an attempt by the Iranian government to control women. Islamic radicals promised safety and security for those who abided by their rules. Rebels who refused to wear the headscarf were threatened with beating, rape or death. These modern women who fought against religious oppression met the minimal requirements of the government rules to safely live in the hostile environment. Through being forced to wear the veil, the control of the Islamic government drives its people to a rebellion.
The hijab is a very important and powerful Muslim symbol that is worn by billions of Muslim women all over the world. Many wear the hijab as a symbol of faith, while others wear it to protect themselves from society’s expectations of women. Some people think that banning the use of the hijab in public is a violation of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. However, others think the banning of the hijab is a necessary precaution. The wearing of the Muslim hijab should be banned in public because it is impractical, Muslims use it to separate themselves from society, and it is a security risk.