Polemics on veiling silk women inside the twentiet

h CenturyIntroduction

.. a lot energy have been expended by simply Muslim males

and then Muslim women to remove the veil and by

other folks to assert or reestablish it.. (Ahmed 167).

This paper explores these efforts in two certain stages: the first and the last

thirds of the twentieth century. Through an analysis of some of the numerous

arguments around the veil, I will try to generate some general characteristics in the

debate on the issue and women over these two particular periods of time.

The starting point will probably be Kasim Amins Tahrir un Maraa (Liberation of

Woman) and the countertop argument of Talat Harbs Tarbiet el Maraa wal

Hijab, (Educating Women and the Veil). The debate between those two

protagonists which has become a original of the issue on the veil

throughout the century (Ahmed S. 164). Malak Hefni Nassifs and Hoda

Shaarawis thinking towards the veil represent a unique insight to two

different interpretations of the hijab issue by simply feminist activists that prevail

throughout the 100 years. The whole synthesis of this early on debate is then put

in juxtaposition to the debate afterwards in the century as displayed by the

avalanche of literary works on the subject in the 70s, the views of a lot of

famous sheikhs like Mohammed Metwally este Shaarawi and others, and the

heated debate initiated by the Ressortchef (umgangssprachlich) of Educations decree of 1994 to

prevent university administrations via imposing the hijab upon girls within the

uniform.

The Early Issue

Kasim Amins Tahrir El-Maraa (Published 1899)

It may not be an exaggeration to say that Amins Tahrir al-Maraa was one

of the most controversial book in Egypts modern record. It has ignited a

good debate and prompted much more than thirty effect articles and books

either to defy or claim his argument against the veil (Ahmed P. 164).

The ideas from the book are not totally new, they echoed the writings of some

freelance writers like Mariam al-Nahhas (1856-1888), Zaynab Fawwaz (1860-1914)

Aisha al-Taymuriah (1840-1902), and Murqus Fahmis (a Coptic lawyer)

four take action play Ing Marah fi al-Sharq or (The Girl in the East) (Badran G.

19). Yet, Amins publication double-scored for coming from a Muslim judge and

for his overt pitch to introduction womens faces. His terms were not the

only concern to the existing notions from the hijab, it was his caliber as a

Moslim judge which has vocalized his call to unveil ladies and gave his book

importance.

After an intro loaded with emotional phrases around the degradation in the

Egyptian female and a great exaltation with the European female, the book is

divided into four sections: Educating women, Womens veil, The

female and the land, and Marital life and divorce.

Amin starts his argument calling for the Hijab Sharaei stating that the

Hijab in its type then (covering the face, the head of hair and the entire body) was

not mandated by the Shariaa. He further more adds that he was not really calling for the

extreme in the West which makes the woman prone to seduction (Amin

P. 65). The disagreement against the veil is in two sections: The religious section

which is generally text model and some Hadith that quick women to

cover the hair and the entire body except for the hands and the face, and the

social (practical / day-to-day life) point of view. The afterwards section contains

social ideas such as the hassle for women using their faces protected

to think in business, to testify in courts as well as to get employed (as the groom

should see her face first). Furthermore, he argues that unveiling tends to make

women view their behaviors as they could be recognized and hence their

status would be at risk if they were doing any incorrect. Still, through the practical

interpersonal point of view, the flimsy bourqo (face cover) used was more

tempting as it the actual viewer inquisitive to see the fact that was intended to be

concealed. He further more argues that, if ladies are locked up in the hareem (part

of the home where women are secluded), then whether or not they did not really commit

any kind of shameful take action, it would not really be because of any advantage in all of them, but to the simple fact

that they would not have the liberty to do normally.

Amin accuses the veil of being a buffer to ladies development and

education (P. 85), quarrelling that it deprived her from interacting with the

society and learning how to live. He shows by evaluating the ignorant

peasant together with the elite urban lady who can speak France and performs the piano

and proves that the ignorat peasant will be

Tweet