When is World Yellow Star Day?

Oh swell, it’s “World Hijab Day.” Whatever the hell that is. It seems kind of early, since it was also “World Hijab Day” back in September, according to Taslima. I wonder when World Chains of Enslavement Day is.

The Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain forum has a page on the subject.

I begrudgingly wore the headscarf until very recently. I started disliking it when I was 13, and my dislike for it got more and more intense until I absolutely fucking hated it by the time I was 17. I didn’t express my feelings towards the hijab, partly because as a Muslim I felt guilty for feeling that way, but mostly because I was too scared that my parents would force me to continue wearing it and view me differently/negatively if I broached the subject.

Absolutely fucking hating it is a good sign.

I’m an ex-muslim and I have to wear it every fucking days. If I don’t, well I might be dead or thrown outside of the house. I don’t want that, because it’s already tensed at home. So I have no choice to wear it every day when I’m in College, when I go to some family friends’ house etc. I’ve been wearing it since I was 12 years old and I’m turning 19 soon. I don’t know when I’ll take it off, but it would be of course after I escape away from my house…. :/

Seven years muffled in a bandage she hates wearing. Horrible.


  1. StevoR, fallible human being says

    Seven years muffled in a bandage she hates wearing. Horrible.

    Horrible, cruel and wrong.
    But the women, those women be strong
    Stronger than hatred, stronger than fear
    Stronger than medieval rubbish held dear
    Throw off the nonsense, throw off Islam
    Be brave and be happy and be you you am!

    (Posting from my brother’s laptop, possibly but hopefully not double posting?)

  2. Wave says

    The hijab is one of the most prevalent forms of passive/aggression around these days.

    And, of course, any opposition to “World Hijab Day” could only be considered a form of bigoty, racism and islamophobia.

  3. Wave says

    I’d just like to add that in countries where the hijab is considered a necessary “protection” against male predations, it symbolises the utter failure of women in those countires to properly discipline and raise their male off-spring.

    Islam doesn’t afford women the right, the authority, to instill iproper dicsipline and self-restraint in their sons. If young boys aren’t taught discipline and self-control very early on by female authority figures, then those young boys will grow up to be largely uselsss adult males; irascible and with a very poor work ethic.

    Ironically, it’s the men who ultimately pay the price of “their” womenfolk covering their heads.

  4. says

    It is the kind of oppression that is recorded here that leads me to say that we must, we simply must, in the democratic West, start banning the burqa. It is not only a symbol of oppression. It is a tool of oppression, and it will maintain the low standing of women in Muslim communities until we say that it is unacceptable in this country (Canada) or any country that holds that men and women are equal and should not be treated unequally. Until we ban the bagging of women, women will remain, in Muslim communities, subordinate to men. No one should be permitted to come to a democratic country and be allowed to get away with this. This has nothing to do with religious freedom. The burqa is a tool of oppression and an instrument of separation of Muslim from the kuffar. It is time that it was done away with. Until we do this, we can scarcely criticise countries where it is required packaging for women.

  5. Wave says

    Ophelia, women are the ones who transmit the values of civilisation to their off-spring, particularly the males, and that process begins at a very early age.

    But when women are erased, and the hijab and niqab go a long ways in doing just that, then those civilisational values aren’t transmitted.

    It is the women who nuture and educate, it is they who “carry” civilisation, who ensure its continuation.

    A culture that forces women to disappear is a culture that has only males and submales ( we call the latter “women”) as members.

    There are grown men in Saudi Arabia who’ve never, not even once, ever seen the faces of their own mothers.

    Such males, when released into civil societies, are often complete sociopaths, misfits who can never be of much use.

    Muslim males who engage in extreme forms of misogyny, forced veiling and such, short circuit their own potential.

    In the end, they only shoot themselves in the foot.

    They’re just to stupid to see that.

  6. theobromine says


    Yes, it would indeed be a Good Thing if no Mulsim women wore a hijab, niqab, or burka. It would similarly be a Good Thing if no ultra-Orthodox Jewish women were forced to wear long sleeves, long dresses and wigs, and no fundamentalist Christian women were forced to grow their hair long and wear long dresses. But I have yet to find anyone who can formulate a law that would address this while still maintaining both the spirit and letter of public secularism – that is, not giving any exceptional treatment (whether in the positive or negative) to any religious practices. .

  7. Wave says


    So you don’t think we should pass a law banning religiously inspired face-coverings in public because we haven’t passed a law banning Christian women from having long hair or Jewish women from wearing long sleeves?

    Several years ago during municipal elections in Montreal, several non-muslim women ( just to make a point about SOMETHING) donned burkas and voted three times at the same polling station ( at two hour intervals). They were never asked for ID because no one had the guts to ask them to expose their faces.

    Do you think that Jewish or Christian women could pull off such a stunt merely by wearing long sleeves and having long hair?

    Lastly, have you ever heard of Jewish women promoting a “World Day for Long Sleeves” or Christian women a “World Day for Long Hair”?

    You attempt to avoid the issue by fudging critical religious differences and by erecting a false equivalence.

    Not only that, but in doing so you actually think you’re being logical and consistent.

  8. theobromine says

    In no way do I support of the idea of “World Hijab Day”. I think it is abhorrent to celebrate a symbol of the subjugation of women. I am also absolutely not in favour of women in burkas or niqabs receiving special treatment.* They should be required to show that their faces match their ID if they wish to vote, or do anything else that normally requires that a person identify themselves.

    I’m not avoiding the issue. But I’m not sure that those who call for a ban have thought through the implications of the logistics of how such a thing could be implemented or enforced. Just how would you determine what sort of face-coverings are “religiously inspired”?

    * I also don’t think that the barber in Toronto should be allowed to refuse to cut a woman’s hair on the grounds that it is against his Muslim faith – again, there should be no special treatment given on the basis of religion.

  9. Duke Eligor says

    Hi all, long time reader, first time poster. I feel a bit ashamed to introduce myself with this wall of text, so my apologies. But, I think I might have a little insight into the issue as someone with a degree in Middle Eastern History.

    Wave: Your view of women is similar to that of Qasim Amin, who mostly saw women as having little value apart from the sons they produce and raise to be good citizens. Despite his importance to the history of feminism in the region, and his probably noble intentions, his ideas are not really accepted today, as they tend to reduce women to mothers of men and little else. In my own opinion, I think that men should be responsible for their own actions, not their moms.

    Eric: The various forms of “islamic clothes” have a very complex history in the last 200 years that varies from country to country. It’s simply not factually valid to claim these things as univerally a symbol or tool of opression, nor is it sound to recommend banning religious dress. After all, we see a wide range of practices regarding covering women. On one extreme there was the Taliban, who forced women to wear what I would describe as a burlap shame-sack on their heads. On another extreme, you have 19th century Egypt, where roving gangs of men accosted women and forcibly ripped the hijab from their heads (and berated them for not being “Modern”). This last one actually has happened in recent times, too, if I recall correctly.

    What these two extremes have in common is their absolute negation of women as agents or subjects of their own actions. They both treat women and their bodies as objects to receive the power of state ideology (whether it’s an Islamic state or a “Modern” one) and men’s desires. The fact is that these forms of dress have cultural, religious, and identity significance to many people, and indeed it’s because of those things that some (not all) choose to wear these forms of dress. The proper way to respect women (or anybody) is to allow them to choose how they dress themselves without fear or coercion. Forcibly banning “islamic clothes” liberates women in about the same way George Bush “liberated” Iraq. I can promise you, a woman who has her clothes ripped off by a group of thugs does not feel empowered.

    For a good start into women’s issues in the region, I recommend Leila Ahmad’s Women and Gender in Islam. For those interested in more detail and history of women, see the works of Lisa Pollard, Beth Baron, and Mona Russell to name a few (though they only focus on Egyptian women). All good stuff.

  10. says

    I feel so bad for these women who are being forced to wear hijab when they don’t want to. It’s really deplorable that their views and experiences don’t get heard, while the experiences of those who agree with wearing the hijab are presented as the only views worth listening to. I absolutely hated wearing the hijab, but I was relatively fortunate in that I “only” had to wear it at certain times (since my parents did not make me wear it, but other Muslims who we knew were more strict, like the people at the Islamic Sunday school I went to for a little while). It feels oppressive for many reasons, just some of which are (1) girls have to wear it while boys don’t, (2) people judge you differently based on whether you’re wearing it or not, (3) depending on your family, you may not have a choice in the matter.

    When it comes to the issue of choosing to wear it, I think that while there are those who do, there is an inherent dishonesty in making wearing something a mandatory part of a religion with a heaven/hell afterlife and then claiming it’s a choice. Not every family or mosque makes it mandatory, of course, but for those who do, they end up sounding dishonest when they claim that the women in their community weren’t forced.

    @Wave (#11):

    Lastly, have you ever heard of Jewish women promoting a “World Day for Long Sleeves” or Christian women a “World Day for Long Hair”?

    No, but they do use it as a way to pretend they’re being more holy or pure than other women who don’t follow their dress codes. Their religions excuse stereotypes about and mistreatment of women who don’t follow their dress code based on the premise that they are all “immoral” and “deserved” the bad treatment. I’m not saying the security concern is not a big issue, but when it comes to issues of equality, covering one’s face isn’t the only type of dress code that can be oppressive of women.

    See, for example, the following post “Modesty, Body Policing and Empowerment: The Hijab (Part One)” by Sierra (author of the Phoenix and Olive Branch blog) at No Longer Quivering. She grew up in a Christian family, and in this post, she discusses the way that people ignore the oppressive dress codes and “body policing” done in Christianity and Judaism. If I want people to listen to the Muslims and former Muslims who talk about oppressive dress codes that they lived with, I can’t then turn around and say to Christians and Jews who feel similarly that their experience wasn’t a big deal.


  11. Brian M says

    The difficulty of course is LEGISLATING, using the power of the State, to intervene in these cases.

    There is a group of nuts (exhibitionists) in San Francisco who have become “nudity activists”. Basically, they decided to start “camping out” in the middle of local comemrcial districts. Charming…and appetizing to the max! The City of San Francisco has now banned public nudity.

    Are the Exhibitionists now being oppressed because their City is forcing them to wear clothing? Or at least, to cover up? The debate rages on!

    In no way am I really comparing the two situations, but this just illustrates the issues associated with clothing laws and bans…and I have no easy answer like “Ban the Hijab”.

  12. theobromine says

    Yes. The exhibitionists *are* being oppressed by the city forcing them to wear clothing, absent health/safety concerns. The sarcastic comment about nudity being “unappetizing” is just the flip side of the same coin that mandates the wearying of hijab/niqab/burka – that is that some people should have a say in/control over the appearance of another person. You don’t like what a naked person looks like? Don’t look at them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *