Sexism Trough Hijab
Sexism Trough Hijab
Sexism Trough Hijab
Introduction
Feminism movement urged the enactment of equality both gender in all aspect whilst
sexism belief in the inherent unfair treatment of women according to the traditional gender role
stereotypes thus feminist purpose is to put end the sexist oppression. Theology Sexism in this
paper reflects the prejudice towards Islamic theology regarding an obligation of hijab upon
Muslim women (Laura, 2010). The hijab perceived as symbol of oppression, imprisonment thus
eliminating the women freedom as well as the threat for intellectual and security.
Importance of Issue
The enforcement women on hijab were the result of patriarchal tradition impeached by
cultural ignorance of west which for centuries has seen Islam as a sexist religion. They had
condemned Islamic religious texts responsible for the legitimation act of gender injustice: the
women’s dress code or hijab became the center of propaganda. Their argument is that
compulsion of hijab never clearly stated in Al Qur’an and only dictated by men according to
their interpretation of text. The issue sexiest of hijab became integral part of the Islamophobia.
Research question
1. How Islamic texts explain the position of hijab as anti-sexiest contradict with the feminist
claim?
2. Does the majority woman of Islam go through oppression because of the hijab?
3. Does Islam is the sexism religion?
Objective
1. To defend the Islamic principal on hijab and to enlighten the people about the position of
hijab in the heart of Muslim women.
2. To present scientific argument regarding misleading perception about the sexism in
Islamic theology.
Review of Literature
Research Methodology
Bibliography
Akhter, Naseem & Munir, Dr. (2017). Hijab (Veil): Protection for Woman (Islamic Perspective)
International Conference on Arabic Studies & Islamic Civilization.
https://worldconferences.net/journals/icasic. 4. 2017-2026.
Winter, Bronwyn. “The Great Hijab Coverup.” Off Our Backs, vol. 36, no. 3, 2006, pp. 38–40.
JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20838653.