I was watching the Today show today. Head scarves and headbands are de rigour
fashion this summer. It is so bizarre to think of the freedom of choice that
women have in this county. We can choose to wear a polka dotted scarf and
flip flops with our skimpy bathing suit. Meanwhile, according to a news
release Friday, Islamic extremists in the Gaza Strip are threatening to “cut
the throats…” of female TV broadcasters in the area if they don’t wear
headscarves on the air. As poverty has risen in the Gaza Strip women have
had to cover their faces with veils. The nonverbal communication of dress
has affected women throughout history. Odd how poverty makes men feel
powerless and they in turn use what power they have to control women.
When teaching nonverbal communication at Florida State I kept up with the
current research on dress. This recent threat by Islamic fundamentalist has
inspired me to do more research on the topic. It is so difficult to imagine
living somewhere that required I cover my head. I really feel the need to
educate myself. Here is a great article on the effect of rising
fundamentalism in women’s dress.

It says, “For instance, veiling takes place at younger and younger ages. In January 2004, during the World Social Forum in Bombay, I was living in a mixed Hindu-Muslim suburb. For the first time in the twenty-odd years I’ve
been visiting India (and cosmopolitan Bombay), I found little girls, aged four or five, playing in the courtyard, wearing headscarves. One sees this more and more frequently elsewhere, including in the United States.
Yet, in the not-so-distant past, in countries where women are traditionally veiled and secluded, little girls that age were never subjected to veiling.
It is another invention of fundamentalists, spreading the unique Islamic
dress around the globe.” Think about what effect that has on a girls’ feelings
about her body.
In her pamphlet, Bas les Voiles! (Down with Veils!), Iranian writer
Chahdortt Djavann — who lives in exile in France – focuses on the rights of
the girl child:
“To impose a veil on a minor is, strictly speaking, to violate her, to use
her body, to define it as a sexual object meant for men. … The shame of
inhabiting a body full of shame, a veiled body, the anguish of inhabiting a
body full of guilt, guilty of existing. … What does veiling do to the girl
child? It turns her into a sexual object: an object, since the veil is
imposed upon her and that its materiality is now part and parcel of her
being, her look, her social existence; and a sexual object: not only because
her hidden hair is a sexual symbol and this symbol has a double meaning
(what one hides, one displays, prohibition is the reverse of desire), but
also because veiling puts the girl child or the teenage girl on the sex
market, on the marriage market, it defines her essentially by and for men’s
eyes, by and for sex and marriage.[2]”
I would love to hear your thoughts on this!