Talk:Muslim feminist views on hijab

Reference of article creation

 * Please see @ Talk:Islamic feminism

Bookku (talk) 06:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Ref : Hammad, Amber (2021)

 * Hammad, Amber (2021) Unveiling The Veil: Self-Representation in Contemporary Muslim Female Art https://doi.org/10.26190/unsworks/2038


 * Visual presentation link https://www.amberhammad.com/

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 03:42, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

evaluation of the article

 * The title of this Wikipedia article is "Islamic feminists views on dress codes". The author immediately begins writing about different views. How one Islamic feminists is for the ban on Hijabis and the other is against it and sees wearing a hijab as an expression of freedom. These opinions are relevant although the author cites a lot of these opinions which doesn't make it look like a trustworthy article.

Nothing in the article was out of date. Although a lot could have been added. Instead of just citing two different opinions and calling that Islamic feminists views, the author could rather have written about multiple views of Islamic feminists and go deeper into the subject. It's all a bit plain at this very moment.

There aren't any equity gaps, although the author could have payed some more attention to why both sides have the opinion they have instead of just citing them.

The article appears to be neutral. The author doesn't make claims but only cites a paraphrases them. However, the author should cite less and, as we mentioned before, tell more about why the feminists have the opinions they have. It doesn't seem like opinions are overrepresented or underrepresented. The author mentions both sides of how the feminists look at the hijab.

The references are neutral sources and the links work. There is only one reference, the eighth reference, where there is no link. This is a sign that the author wasn't paying attention and didn't check after he put in the references. However the author did use nine sources for a relatively small text which shows us that the author did some research before writing the article. Breadriots (talk) 11:47, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Will get around to writing about this
I would like to add stuff to this article. There’s so much to say like Mona Eltahawy, Khaled Abou el Fadl, Abla Hassan, Zahra Rahnavard, Celene Ibrahim, Fatima Mernissi. Hopefully I’ll have time to edit this soon so it can reflect legal views, pro hijab views, etc. --Zaynab1418 (talk) 23:45, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

The title
Greetings ,

Just I recently tried to point out @ Talk:Gender roles in Islam  how less knowledge of different view positions can mix up the things.

A part of sentence in that article "Although there are no clearly defined roles for men and women in the Qur'an " is supposed to be used by Islamic feminism. Second part of sentence ".. it is strongly implied that each gender provides equally significant contributions to the family realm." is a conservative view. Wikipedia users edited sentences to do synthesis of two entirely different positions without sourcing.

Your changing of title and opening scope of the article for different views than that of just Islamic feminism can open gates for kind of mixing up unknowingly but regularly happens with views of Islamic feminism which are supposed to be distinct than others. Requesting you to take following points into account


 * To begin with article title was Islamic feminist views on dress codes since it was forked out of the article Islamic feminism


 * Your change of title Islamic feminist views on dress codes to Muslim feminist views on hijab


 * I hope you have taken into account such change will cause inclusion of views of Secular feminists among Muslims.


 * Pl. take into account vast majority does not know nuanced aspects and differences in views and end up mixing up every thing together without requisite differentiation. And segregating views properly according to their types might remain a headache.


 * To the minimum what I suggest is to have separate sections for views of Islamic Feminists and secular feminist and separate section for criticism of feminist views from non feminist orthodox.


 * Equality is core value to any form of feminism


 * Every Muslim women is not automatically feminist, there are three strands


 * First: Orthodox Nisa'ism believing in mandatory hijab/veil codes, limited rights and Gender roles in Islam for women as per traditional interpretation of scriptures talk about equity for women but not equality. Basically this does not amount to feminism since equality is core value to any form of feminism. So their views are not supposed to come in scope of this article as views of feminists. But you can include their views which criticize feminism.


 * Second: Islamic feminism, Islamic feminist basically believe in ' equal rights'. Reinterpret Islamic scriptures in their own ways to support concept of ' equal rights' as much as possible but within four corners of Islam.
 * Islamic feminists have very different different views among themselves about hijab / veiling of women. Some of them might support or advocate non mandatory and voluntary hijab / veiling of women . Some would also argue against societal or government  pressures asking women to hijab / veiling.
 * Islamic feminists views might sound much like Secular Muslim feminists at times but Islamic feminists are less likely to talk language of 'My body my choice'


 * Third: Secular Muslim feminists explicitly ask for equal rights as universal human rights and security irrespective of what women wear. Secular Muslim feminists usually would not take recourse to religious language and would not spend time on reinterpretation of scripture etc. For them What to wear is women's choice that is it. More likely to talk language of 'My body my choice'. Basically it is difference of method in strategizing about how to challenge established patriarchal practices in Muslim communities whether by speaking reinterpreted religious language or a strait confrontation with patriarchy, Secular Muslim feminists opt for the later.

I hope and request you continue with change of title if you have enough long term commitment to periodically cross check different views are not being mixed up and misrepresented inadvertently.

Thanks and warm regards

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 03:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Well said Python Drink (talk) 19:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Article scope
This article seems more than a little strange to me given it's unnecessarily narrow scope. Why bother strictly with islamic feminist views when there's no article on feminist views, or even more broadly views on hijab at all? I'd be in favour of increasing the scope of the article and changing the title. XeCyranium (talk) 01:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @XeCyranium
 * As such this article was not written purposefully to exclude secular feminist views but this is an article forked out of existing article Islamic feminism due to disproportionate length issue.
 * Whether you do not find scope of following articles reasonably broad enough?
 * Islamic clothing
 * Hijab
 * Hijab and burka controversies in Europe
 * Hijabophobia
 * Please help others understand rational - little better- behind, ' If no one wrote article on secular and non-Islamic views on Hijab so the article pertaining to "Islamic feminist views on dress codes" or for that matter "Muslim feminist views on hijab"  can not have separate existence.
 * How do you suggest to address following concern?
 * Understanding of common editors on nuances of traditionalism Vs Secular Feminism Vs Islamic feminism is too less and even simple copy editing without knowing nuances can risk misrepresentation of one or other group of views.
 * &#32;Bookku   (talk) 03:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I have to be honest I'm having a very difficult time parsing what your comment is intended to mean. Could you clarify what you mean by the nuances being too, well, nuanced to be represented in a single article? I don't see why secular feminist views couldn't be included, especially given said views exist and appear just as notable. XeCyranium (talk) 04:46, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @XeCyranium In brief: Please feel free to request move per Requested moves or WP:RfC.
 * My detail view.
 * 1) Please refer to what I have already discussed in just previous section on this talk page itself and one user has appreciated the view with 'Well said'.
 * 2) Since some other user has already changed article title on their own from the title "Islamic feminist views on dress codes" to "Muslim feminist views on hijab". So effectively scope is already increased to include Secular Muslim Feminist views.
 * Now it seems you wish to include Secular non-Muslim Feminist views too in this article itself. Once space is given to Secular views then those are coming from Muslim feminist or non-Muslim feminist does not matter much.
 * 3) What you have skipped is one of my question; We already do have articles Islamic clothing, Hijab,
 * Hijab and burka controversies in Europe,
 * Hijabophobia a) Whether you do not find those article scope broad enough? b) How do you propose to avoid overlap of the content if we go for further broadening of the scope of this article? c) How do you propose to counter slippery slope argument saying, 'why do you reserve article for feminists and why non feminists can not be included?' Once that too is done what is difference in other broad articles and this articles? this article risks to become just another fork of other articles. How would you address such possibility?
 * 4) I do not own Wikipedia articles, if you still feel Wikipedia community should broaden scope and change title of this article. Please feel free to request move per Requested moves or WP:RfC. &#32;Bookku   (talk) 08:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Hijab and burka controversies in Europe,
 * Hijabophobia a) Whether you do not find those article scope broad enough? b) How do you propose to avoid overlap of the content if we go for further broadening of the scope of this article? c) How do you propose to counter slippery slope argument saying, 'why do you reserve article for feminists and why non feminists can not be included?' Once that too is done what is difference in other broad articles and this articles? this article risks to become just another fork of other articles. How would you address such possibility?
 * 4) I do not own Wikipedia articles, if you still feel Wikipedia community should broaden scope and change title of this article. Please feel free to request move per Requested moves or WP:RfC. &#32;Bookku   (talk) 08:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Help review edits of YS USA
Pl. refer to changes made by. One edit summary goes '..Expanded on Muslim feminist ideas on the hijab found from religious scholars and historical bloggers. ..' This seems confusing. Another edit looks like WP:OR or WP:SYNTH. &#32;Bookku   (talk) 05:32, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Pinging users participated previously on this talk page, other users too can help in review