In an article published by The New York Times, Vanessa Friedman addressed the latest wave of prominent clothing brands releasing collections that are tailored for Muslim women.
The online release of the “burkini,” a full-body bathing suit by Marks & Spencer, sparked a debate, but that”s not the only company striving to be inclusive.
Corrin Bond
Argonaut
DKNY has a Ramadan collection that includes more covered-up items, like jumpsuits and ankle-length shirt dresses. Other companies, like Dolce & Gabbana and Tommy Hilfiger have introduced collections of patterned head scarves, hijabs and loose-fitting full-length robes called abayas.
Friedman reported that recently, Laurence Rossignol, the French minister for women”s rights, claimed that brands who cater to a religious group that promotes modesty are encouraging women to lock their bodies up. Although she later recanted the statement, she even went so far as to compare Muslim women to “consenting slaves.”
In this case, women aren”t being oppressed by the patriarchy – they”re being oppressed by other women.
One woman telling another woman that she isn”t allowed to dress herself and cover her body to whatever degree she”s comfortable with is just as bad as a man telling a woman that she must cover herself no matter what. A more feminist direction would be to advocate for choice – to allow people of faiths that encourage modest dress to have the ability to choose how they do or don”t want to dress.
The important part is that women have the right to have a choice.
I”ve met young women practicing Islam to varying degrees who were strong and smart and proud of the clothing they wore. These were women who didn”t view wearing a hijab or abaya as an act of oppression.
There are definitely more extreme sects of Islam, as with any religion, in which women are abused and oppressed, but the idea that all Muslim women everywhere need to be “liberated” from patriarchal oppression in the form of the clothing they wear is absurd.
It is also possible to culturally identify with a religion while not strictly practicing that religion. You can be Christian and not follow the Bible. You can be Jewish and not attend Temple. You can be Catholic and not take communion or go to church. You can be a Muslim woman and choose not to completely cover your body.
While these clothing lines might be specifically directed at Muslims, Islam is not the only religion that encourages women to cover up. Sects of Christianity and Catholicism urge women to be modest in their dress. Many Mennonites and Amish practice wearing “plain dress.” For women, this often means wearing ankle-length dresses. They also have customs that include wearing prayer caps or scarves. Sikhs can have a dress code as well – they are encouraged to wear their hair long, and men often cover their heads with a turban.
Beyond that, deciding to dress modestly isn”t always related to religion. There are women who exist in this world who simply want to wear long dresses or pants and long-sleeved shirts. For some women, wearing more clothes is a matter of personal preference that has nothing to do with religion.
Those who criticize clothing lines for attempting to be more inclusive by expanding their client base to Muslims are not standingfor feminist ideals.
We should encourage women to dress however they feel most comfortable – to wear clothing that completely covers their body, to wear clothing that covers as much as they like or, if they”d rather, to wear nothing at all.
In the same way that women should not be penalized for showing as much skin as they please, they also should not be shamed for choosing to not.
Corrin Bond can be reached at [email protected] or on Twitter @CorrBond