Skip to content

Headless women?

July 6, 2010

In Ideen, a new magazine both by and for young Muslim, why are the women practically headless?

Other photos include woman with her face pointed toward the ground, a woman in a hijab and veil with only closed eyes visible, and two other photos of women with their eyes and the tops of their heads cut off.

If they can walk around in public, why can’t their photos be in this magazine?

9 Comments leave one →
  1. July 9, 2010 3:18 am

    These women are also headless but are advertising for a high-end brand – but that is considered OK, right?

    I think in both cases it’s because the clothes are the focus, not the models, yet in your post you skew it to ‘illustrate’ that Islam supposedly oppresses women because they cover their bodies. So then the most liberated and respected women on the planet must be porn actresses because the whole world can see right up their you-know-twhats?

    Don’t let your ignorance get in the way of the truth.

    • Michele permalink*
      July 9, 2010 1:08 pm

      By the way, did you read the first comment to the article that you linked to (click ‘Just a Thought’ above)?

      “Wait a minute … this is a strange title for the paper. There was no objectification going on at all. This study is not about what effects men have on women but about what women think about men and suggests that women are sexist. This could, of course, be their response to their real-life experience with men, but the study has nothing to say about that. — Dreg”

      Do you think that women who are forced to cover themselves up and hide from men would behave any differently than the women in this study?

  2. Michele permalink*
    July 9, 2010 1:02 pm

    You’re right about this particular set of photos focusing on the clothes and I do realize that many fashion layouts and ads don’t show the models’ heads.

    However, this fashion layout included the hijabs as part of the outfits. Therefore, it would seem appropriate to show the entire hijab in each photo. Would you expect a photo spread which included hats to only show half of the hat?

    Additionally, the fashion article was only part of the magazine. No photo in the magazine has a full-face shot of a woman. We either see only the eyes or only the lower half of the face or, as on the cover, a partial view of her face with eyes downcast. Why?

  3. Taaj permalink
    July 11, 2010 5:21 pm

    This magazine did not have pictures of men either. I’m not sure what your point is. The magazine also clearly explains that the hijab is not just the cloth on the head, but the entire outfit. So these pictures have depicted it properly and the focus is appropriate.

  4. muslima permalink
    July 21, 2010 2:48 am

    this magazine is for and by YOUNG MUSLIMS so let them say what they think about it!

  5. Michele permalink*
    July 21, 2010 9:48 am

    Isn’t it for young Muslim women?

    When something is put out in public, anyone can comment on it. (Just like you’re commenting on this blog.)

    My interest was in why all of the faces were obscured, hidden, or cut off.

    Can you explain that?

  6. Taaj permalink
    July 21, 2010 10:13 am

    No it is not for Muslim women only, it is for all Muslims, mostly geared toward youth. Adults are more than welcome to read however.

    The faces were obscured because many Islamic traditions forbid the depiction of eyes (of males or females). It has nothing to do with genders.

    Out of respect for the Muslims who follow that tradition, they obscured eyes and faces. There are varying degrees of opinion among Muslims of what can/cannot be depicted. There is unanimous agreement however that anything without a soul is permissible to depict.

    I think Muslima’s point was that your criticism is not constructive. You are free to criticize however much you wish and in whatever manner, but there is no value in criticizing for the sake of criticizing.

  7. Michele permalink*
    July 21, 2010 10:36 am

    Eyes were not obscured.

    Some pictures had only eyes shown while the rest of the face was covered by a hijab and niqab or some combination of scarves.

    Some pictures chopped off the eyes and the top of the head.

    The cover had the model looking down and blurred her face so that her eyes were hidden.

    Can anyone answer the question that I asked? If these young women can be in public wearing a hijab and modest clothes, why can’t their faces be shown in a magazine?

    And while we’re at it, what do you think about Muslim women who wear a hijab with clothes that cover their bodies but are skin tight and actually very revealing?

  8. Taaj permalink
    July 21, 2010 10:41 am

    If eyes were shown then the other reasoning could be the concept of lowering one’s gaze. It is a principle both men and women in Islam practice.
    So really this is an issue of modesty, hiding one’s beautiful features.

    In real life it is not something a woman can control if a man stares at her disrespectfully, but it can be controlled for pictures in a magazine.

    The “hijab” is not just the headscarf. It refers to physical head-to-toe covering, and one’s character. A woman who is covers her hair but wears tight clothes is not practicing hijab. A woman who has a full burqa on but has flirtatious behavior with men, is also not practicing the hijab properly.

    Hope that answers it for you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: