Abu-Lughod and Haydar

Authors Maysan Haydar and Lila Abu-Lughod both have different opinions on how the Muslim veiling tradition has to do with the feminist movement. Within Haydar’s writing, her goal is to connect feminism with Muslim’s and Americans and on the other hand, Abu-Lughod tries to separate the two. Each author is able to successfully capture their audience’s attention by providing diverse facts and anecdotes to support their claims. Haydar’s article, “Body Outlaws”, has an Americanized Muslim point of view and focuses primarily on using the rhetorical strategy, pathos, to get her readers to understand her outlook on veiling. Abu-Lughod’s article, “The Muslim Woman”, has a Middle Eastern Muslim point of view and uses the rhetorical strategies, ethos and logos, by providing facts and using authorities throughout her paper, which helps to gain her readers trust.  Both authors are attempting to reach out to their audiences, which consist of mainly American feminists who believe that veiling is the opposite of what feminism represents.

            In Haydar’s article, one of her main claims is that veiling should not be seen as a negative aspect of a Muslim women’s life. Haydar is able to portray her argument by recalling an experience she had on a bus with a non-Muslim girl. “ . . . she couldn’t understand how we could dress this way. ‘Me, I got to be free.’ To my eyes her idea of freedom involved a complicated hairstyle, loads of makeup, and jeans she probably had to sew herself into” (Haydar 260). Haydar is able to rebuttal the girls point of view with her own. The girl in this context represents many people that believe in the stereotypes on Muslim women and their veils. Haydar is able to connect with her audience through pathos for she knows nobody likes to be judged negatively and shows how easy it is to judge others that do not understand Muslim practices.

            Haydar also claims that veiling helps young women cope with harassment from men. Haydar uses personal experiences involving men that allowed for her to not be harassed during her teenage years because of her veil. “The weirdness that normally clouds boy-girl interactions was lifted . . . I got to bypass a lot of damaging experiences” (Haydar 261). Haydar is able to grasp her reader’s attention by taking most women’s points of views that didn’t veil and then describe similar situations from her point of view. This allows for her audience to see both sides of the argument and understand where she is coming from.

            In Abu-Lughod’s article, she claims that Americans views on Middle Eastern women are problematic for the media creates stereotypes and puts labels on everyone. Abu-Loghod says: “…It is odd that in many of the images from the media, the veiled women stand in for the countries the articles are about. None of these articles in the New York Times Magazine, for example, was about Muslim women, or even Jordanian or Egyptian women. ” (Abu-Lughod 2). Here she is referring to magazines in which the covers have veiled Muslim women on them, which gives off a very stereotypical demeaning. Abu-Lughod is emphasizing her claim that the media is grouping Muslim women and non-Muslim women. She later goes on to say: “. . . they make it hard to think about the Muslim world without thinking about women, creating a seemingly huge divide between ‘us’ and ‘them’ based on the treatment or positions of women” (Abu-Lughod 2). Abu-Lughod is exposing the separation between Muslim and non-Muslim feministic views.

            Abu-Lughod attempts to redefine the meaning of veiling so that it captures freedom, control and respect for Middle Eastern women. She uses authorities, such as Hanna Papanek to help strengthen her argument. Papanek, and anthropologist that worked in Pakistan, “described the burqa as ‘portable seclusion.’ She noted that many saw it as a liberating invention since it enabled women to move out of segregated living spaces while still observing the basic moral requirements of separating and protecting women from unrelated men” (Abu-Lughod 3). Abu-Lughod’s use of ethos helps support her argument and gives her audience reassurance that she knows what she is talking about. By bringing in authoritative figures, Abu-Lughod’s readers can trust her more and her claims become more believable.