Until today, American Muslim women have been fighting an uphill battle for their right to cover their heads in the traditional hijab. Whether at school, work, even government offices, we have stood unflinching as the debate about Islamophobia, creeping Shariah and all the other ugly words associated with being Muslim in America have swirled about us. Hearing negative comments, facing discrimination in hiring, being marginalized in social groups or treated with sympathy for assumed oppression, we have faced it all while defending our right to express our faith through our dress. Until today.
A little known six-year litigation between a Muslim woman and the Orange County Sheriff’s Department ended in a landmark case today in the Muslim’s favor, awarding damages to Souhair Khatib of Anaheim for the indignity she faced at the hands of law enforcement officials. The case revolved around police holding cell procedures, which demand that articles of clothing deemed dangerous be removed from those taken into custody. While admirable in theory, the procedure failed to take into account religious clothing that the person taken into custody may be wearing – such as the hijab. Those who know Muslim women who wear the hijab (be it in the form of a head scarf, coat, burka or anything else), will also be aware of the importance they award this article of clothing. Most of us are fiercely protective of it – and ourselves in it – and will resist ardently in case of removal in the company of men. For Souhair Khatib, who was not a criminal, having her hijab forcibly removed in front of men despite her pleadings, was a real nightmare, one that I cannot imagine undergoing myself.
Although Muslim women encountering law enforcement in this manner probably isn’t too much of a regular occurrence, it’s not the first time something like this has happened. Last year a Houston Muslim woman complained about having her hijab removed by police while being detained after a street protest. Thankfully that case didn’t go to court, but it is leadng to a more or less voluntary sensitivity training by the Houston police department to make sure they’re not embarrassed in the media again. In the case of Souhair Khatib, six years of litigation was necessary for law enforcement to understand what should be elementary for all of us: knowledge about the “other” leads to tolerance and ultimately a more peaceful world. A police department (or any other area of public service) that deals with people of different faiths must take the initiative to teach its employees about issues those groups find important. Otherwise they have to pay the price ($85,000 in this situation) and at the end of the process still have to conduct the training.
As a Muslim woman who wears the hijab, I’m worried that something like this could ever happen to me or my daughter. But I’m also convinced that ignorance is the main culprit behind many such incidences. I have high hopes that Souhair Khatib’s case will pave the way for other police departments to voluntarily educate themselves about genuine areas of concern that their citizens may have. It’s a small price to pay for tolerance and peace.
Saadia Faruqi is an interfaith liaison for the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, and editor of the Interfaith Houston blog. She is actively involved in interfaith coalition building in the Greater Houston community. Most recently she has led a cultural sensitivity training for the Houston Police Department and continues to offer Islam in America presentations at local academic and religious institutions. In addition to her own blog, she writes for the Houston Community Newspapers and Religious Freedom USA.
But would it have been any better if a female cop or soldier asked her to remove the hijab for security reasons. That she might have had a gun or bomb underneath? Was it that males asked her to do so? In Israel, female soldiers frisk Muslim women if there is suspicion of a bomb or gun. Wouldn’t Saadia agree to that? that a woman has the right to ask another woman to show that the suspected woman is risk-free and carrying no concealed weapon.
mr. porter, listening to your response and question brings a lot up for me……
on some deep level there’s the painful and passionate emotion on either side of this argument: emotionally it boils down to: SECURITY/SAFETY vs. HUMAN DIGNITY.
it really hurts that that is what it seems to come to, even in many cases w/o religious garb, only sensitive travelers being frisked insensitively by guards just doing their job.
i see the dilemma of both sides, and because of the power of the emotions all around, i see the deeper, more meaningful solutions coming from PURELY HUMANISTIC sources…….from shared feelings of both sides….of acknowledging the difficulty each side suffers….including insults, accusations, suspicions of ulterior motives, and so much that causes human suffering that I BELIEVE, IS WITHIN OUR POWER TO SOLVE .
it is never easy to reveal these deeper feelings, especially to strangers and ‘alien’ types to our experience.
since this pain is so universal, it emerges as the VITAL ESSENCE OF THE POSSIBLE UNDERSTANDING of other, unfamiliar people, while each side finds ways to fulfill its duties and responsibilities.
it promises to require much energy, thought and even devotion and some compromise, to seeking true peace through much effort and challenge.
no easy solutions, but, real possibility……if the deeper intent is seriously sought until found……
I find the whole issue of the hijab, religious rights and woman’s rights in Western Democracies really strange. Here in the US and western Democracies we hear of Muslim woman fighting for the right to wear a hijab, which is essentially a symbol of religious oppression. Then there are Muslim countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia and at one time Afghanistan, where woman have to wear a hajab or burkha outside their home or face criminal prosecution. I wonder if anyoe sees the irony here
I gotta say this lawsuit this unbelievable. The fact that it even wenbt to court is a strong indication of civil rights rather than oppression. Souhair Khatib fought successfully in court for the right to continue to be oppressed. Good for her. The Tikkuninstas, i’m sure, embrace this selective oppression of woman. As for Souhair Khatib, she has ripped off the Orange County tax payer with her frivolous lawsuit. I doubt she realizes that her profit is the tax payers loss.
Just and FYI, though, I commute to the down town of my city daily. It is the norm, rather then the exception, that I see Muslim woman in hijabs and burkhas. I see it in my office building, so I am assuming the company the woman work for has no issue with it.
And a message to the author, Saadia Faruqi. The US may have social struggles with regard to ethnic, religious and gender rights, but society here has grown and learned as a result of those struggles. We look in the other direction at the Arab spring, and it seems like those struggles are taking the country in the wrong direction. Woman and religious minorities are under siege by the emerging regimes. In some of those countries, like Saudi Arabia and Iran, woman don’t have a chance. And finally, in Pakistan, a girl was nearly murdered while fighting for her right to go to school.
So given the choice, where would the author want to live? I’ll take our flawed Democracy in the US
As a Muslim woman I’m grateful to be living in the U.S., but this country became great because people spoke up against whatever forms of oppression or discrimination they saw in their times. Times have changed a great deal, but only because America changed to accommodate everyone. If America is to remain a great nation, then it has to continue on the path toward understanding.
I’m a hijab wearing Muslim woman who, like many other women, have found liberation in the Muslim dress code. Yes, there is discrimination in the so called Muslim countries, but not because of Islamic rules, it is because they are going against Islamic injunctions. Islam gives women respect and dignity, giving them the right to live, the right to a good upbringing, the right (even the duty) of getting an education, the right to marriage, and the right to divorce, the right to inherit property and the right to spend out of their wealth. If these Muslim countries are disregarding this, it is no wonder as they have deviated from Islam and have become corrupt to the core, so as with all other faiths, they will use and misuse the dictates of Islam, bending them out of shape, just to suite their purposes.
Hijab is there to protect women and to keep them from being objectified as you see happening everywhere in the world including here. Women’s faces and bodies are used to sell everything under the sun. They have to live up to the standards of being “sexy” or their self worth diminishes. I call that oppression, while you call my dress code oppressive. The only thing my hijab or coat or niqaab oppresses is men’s ability to see me, whereas I’m free to conduct my daily business. It’s a matter of perspective.
The Hijab is no more a “symbol of religious oppression” than is a turban worn in public by Sikhs (both men and women). Clearly, the Hijab is an article of clothing worn by a Muslim woman to maintain a sense of modesty and her sense of grace in public places. This is an honorable and beautiful thing. As a Sikh I presented with representatives of Islam and Arab culture, to law enforcement and judges for three years, to enable these audiences to achieve “cultural competency” in relating to Muslims, Arabs and Sikhs in the course of their official duties. These presentations were sponsored by the US Dept of Justice. Unfortunately, it’s obvious that traditions of prejudice continue.
Sikhs are now protected by federal statute and turbans cannot be touched or removed by Transportation Security Agency officers. A private area must be provided in order to require a Sikh to remove his or her turban. A female officer would be required in the case of a woman. These same courtesies should be to Muslims and all faiths who maintain headcoverings in public as a matter of religious cultural identity, modesty and personal dignity.
The Hijab is no more a “symbol of religious oppression” than is a turban worn in public by Sikhs (both men and women). Clearly, the Hijab is an article of clothing worn by a Muslim woman to maintain a sense of modesty and her sense of grace in public places. This is an honorable and beautiful thing. As a Sikh I presented with representatives of Islam and Arab culture, to law enforcement and judges for three years, to enable these audiences to achieve “cultural competency” in relating to Muslims, Arabs and Sikhs in the course of their official duties. These presentations were sponsored by the US Dept of Justice. Unfortunately, it’s obvious that traditions of prejudice continue.
Sikhs are now protected by federal statute and turbans cannot be touched or removed by Transportation Security Agency officers. A private area must be provided in order to require a Sikh to remove his or her turban. A female officer would be required in the case of a woman. These same courtesies should be extended to Muslims and all faiths who maintain headcoverings in public as a matter of religious cultural identity, modesty and personal dignity.
Jack,
What you suggest is very feasible, women can and should definitely be frisked by female officers in a female-only environment, whether it be a separate room or curtained off area. Israel isn’t the only country that does that, in fact all Muslim countries have such facilities for women in every office of the government, because they understand the importance women themselves put on their hijab. Even in USA this is understood by some… If the airports can ensure that female travelers are searched by female TSA officers and if the hijab or coat needs to be removed they move to a more private area, then why can’t the police do the same? I’m afraid the reason is that law enforcement don’t care as much, they assume that anyone who comes through their doors is suspect, and if these “criminals” wanted to protect their civil liberties they should’nt have committed the crime. But the fact remains that as human beings we all have certain rights and the police should be able to figure out how to do their jobs effectively without infringing on those rights. We need to remember that neither of the women in my post, or the countless others who are in similar situations (including myself) object not to removing the hijab, just removing it in the presence of men. Surely that’s easily fixed witout resorting to lawsuits?
Why does Saadia embrace tyne oppress of woman in her own religion?
Sammy,
Thank you for your comments and questions. Islam does not use the hijab as a form of oppression, and according to Islamic teachings women are allowed to carry out every activity under the sun, same as men are. But of course there are men in every country and every religion who use their faith to oppress women. I cannot be held responsible for others’ practices. But I can tell you that in every country including Arab countries there are countless women like me who wear the hijab as a form of expressing their love towards God. I feel it is ignorant of people to define hijab as oppression when they do not have full knowledge of the reasons why Islam has mandated it and the freedoms that Islam gives Muslim women even under the cover they wear. If you are truly interested, there are lots of resources out there and I can certainly point you to them. But assuming that being covered up is oppression is unfair to someone like me who does it out of pride and righteousness. That women are oppressed in some countries is undeniable, and I am equally vocal about the distorted image of Islam being portrayed by those countries. There are also many women in those countries who are speaking out and making inroads against those injustices, althought they don’t make the news here. At the same time, I am proud to be American, and extremely grateful for the feedoms this country has given me. That doesn’t mean I cannot try to remove injustices that affect me personally and applaud actions that move us all towards a better place to live for everyone.
I think it is time take the fight for woman’s rights to the Arab world and iran. Don’t forget the Islam emerged from Saudi Arabia and some of the worst oppression of females rests there now.
Dear fellow respondents,
As a Traditionalist Catholic woman who chooses to dress with extreme modesty: a head scarf and loose dress with trousers underneath at all times, I sympathize with the woman in this story. I wear my scarf for religious reasons–for the love of God, and to honor Him at all times. Likewise with my choice of clothes. Yes, I have been mistaken for a nun on a couple of occasions, and I have gently corrected the misunderstanding. In one case, I helped the young woman who sought me out to find a real nun for spiritual discernment.
I deeply respect Muslim women for choosing to cover themselves before God and not to give in to the tremendous secular pressure to dress in revealing clothes for the objectification by men and competition with other women. I only wish that there were more support in the Christian community for modest dressing among women.
I feel that the comments here that suggest that a woman could hide a bomb under a scarf, or that loose clothing makes a woman oppressed are misguided, to say the least. Don’t you guys at least watch “HOMELAND”? It takes a Marine’s uniform to hide a bomb vest. >;-} [joke!]
I agree with Ms Faruqi that Muslim women are oppressed in countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan, but that is a cultural and geopolitical factor, oftentimes due to the ignorance and brutality of men. Given that, I am surprised that they use ignorance and brutality of men as a defense of taking a woman’s scarf off her head. Would you ask a nun to remove her habit, or an Orthodox Jewish woman to remove her tichel? I think not.
Please recognize the beam in your own eyes before you complain about the mote in Ms. Faruqi’s.
Shalom, Salaam, and Peace be With You!
Add iran, Saudi Arabia and soon to be Egypt, BTW, I do think the Ultra orthodox jewish woman are oppressed through religious edicts]’
“I feel that the comments here that suggest that a woman could hide a bomb under a scarf, or that loose clothing makes a woman oppressed are misguided, to say the least. Don’t you guys at least watch “HOMELAND”? It takes a Marine’s uniform to hide a bomb vest. >;-} [joke!]”
A woman exiting the Gaza Strip to a medical appointment in Beer Sheva’s Saroka Hospital was hiding a bomb in her clothing. She was going to blow herself up in the lobby off the hospital. Your joke is ha ha funny.
A bomb can be hidden under a sweater or a skirt, or even in an underwear if you recall — and that is what makes the headscarf scare rather silly because you need to be essentially stripping people naked to actually find a bomb, which is not done)…if there is concern for security, as in airports, then of course there should be adequate facilities made to check people, but in seclusion, like they do at the airport now a days. Stripping people in public is not the answer if you want any semblance of humanity left in society.
I suggest you choose an example of a woman who was stripped in public,. This is not one of this examples.
The poor tax payer is force to pay for a frivolous law suit.
A woman who religiously and habitually covers her head feels almost as shocked, embarrassed and violated as an average woman asked to remove her shirt in public. There are places in the world where being topless is considered just fine by women, but the average American woman forced to do so would feel violated. Law enforcement, of all the people, need have enough cultural sensibility…and they generally do. This instance seemed deliberately malicious and it was a good thing it was pursued in court. Tax payers’ dollars were wasted by the Police, not the victim.
This was much to o about nothing and she wasted court time to get her 5 minutes of fame. And you sm to accept the oppression of woman within the Muslim faith
As a traditional Catholic, are you for a woman’s right to choose?
I congratulate Saadia Farooqui for expressing and working to support the donning of “hijab” by a small percentage of ladies in our country. By wearing a “hijab”, an outer lose covering over the head and the upper torso, a muslim woman does not intend to show that she is “unique” or that she yearns “attention”.This is just yet another “style” of donning clothes, whose one of the functions is to cover a body. If people could understand the many functions of a “hijab”, it can generate a positive affect that can work wonders for the society we live and work in. I earnestly hope that through pioneering work of ladies like Saadia Farooqui, a time will come when the wearing of “hijab” will no longer be considered “weird” or “oppressive” but a dignified “style” of clothing . Keep up the good and positive work Saadia Farooqui!
So named on this, I see no reason why a woman can not be asked to remove a hijab for a moment for a search.
On Tikkun Daily, Muslim woman are supported for they acceptance of subjugation by their masters and Jewish woman are supported for the rebellion against authority. Why is this?