Cool, I’ve highlighted women a few times last year in my work. But I think you undercut your argument by using the hijab example for the purposes of intersectionality and the inability to separate the fact that she’s a woman from her Muslim identity.
There’s a very obvious way in which the question of wearing a hijab can be separated from both being a woman and the religion of Islam. Here’s how:
Does the government have a right to require people to wear things?
We have a very obvious example of how this idea was completely separated from the question of Muslim women in basically all of Western society. Many of the people who are supporting Iranian women who are protesting the requirements of women to wear hijabs by the government were extremely pro-mask mandates and forcing women to wear masks. They were also more than willing to force it on men.
It’s morally contradictory to be okay with requiring it in one situation and being against requiring it in other contexts. In both cases, the government is saying that it’s in favour of safety for those who are being required to wear it.
So you might want to address that if you are going to cover the issue of hijab requirements.
Well, the organization that defined intersectionality isn't concerned with the wearing of hijabs. It's purely an example. They are concerned with the complexities of what it means to be impacted by membership in multiple groups. And depending of the woman, the ways in which the intersection of those memberships impact their opportunities.
I understand that but in your explanation of the importance of intersectionality, you used it as an example. I have my issues with the idea of intersectionality, but it’s important to use examples that make sense for the circumstances.
Cool, I’ve highlighted women a few times last year in my work. But I think you undercut your argument by using the hijab example for the purposes of intersectionality and the inability to separate the fact that she’s a woman from her Muslim identity.
There’s a very obvious way in which the question of wearing a hijab can be separated from both being a woman and the religion of Islam. Here’s how:
Does the government have a right to require people to wear things?
We have a very obvious example of how this idea was completely separated from the question of Muslim women in basically all of Western society. Many of the people who are supporting Iranian women who are protesting the requirements of women to wear hijabs by the government were extremely pro-mask mandates and forcing women to wear masks. They were also more than willing to force it on men.
It’s morally contradictory to be okay with requiring it in one situation and being against requiring it in other contexts. In both cases, the government is saying that it’s in favour of safety for those who are being required to wear it.
So you might want to address that if you are going to cover the issue of hijab requirements.
Well, the organization that defined intersectionality isn't concerned with the wearing of hijabs. It's purely an example. They are concerned with the complexities of what it means to be impacted by membership in multiple groups. And depending of the woman, the ways in which the intersection of those memberships impact their opportunities.
I understand that but in your explanation of the importance of intersectionality, you used it as an example. I have my issues with the idea of intersectionality, but it’s important to use examples that make sense for the circumstances.