Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

John Lewis's new line, hijabs to wear at school watch

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    About as inappropriate as water bras for children.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Why would John Lewis care what "many people" see it as being closely linked to, when their primary objective is to make money, and when, if they chose not to sell hijabs for school, someone else would (since ultimately, people who want to wear a hijab are going to wear a hijab)?
    "There is a strong case for saying even large chains like John Lewis have a certain level of social responsibility" just means the debate is open.

    The person I quoted was saying the discussion isn't even important - I say it is.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joker12345)
    I for one think this is a step backwards. Once a major retailer begins to stock these clothes for young girls, it will become even more acceptable. Those parents who aren't sure about making their child wear religious dress will think it's okay to do so, as it's in shops lots of Muslim girls must be wearing them. We should be discouraging the religious indoctrination of young children, not supporting and enabling it.
    Not to mention, school uniform is there for a reason, everybody is supposed to wear it and look the same. Headwear was never usually a part of uniform, and surely to wear it defeats the purpose of uniform as it'll make people stand out.

    Note - if these were sold only for adults I'd have oh problem with it, as these are just people who have chosen to follow a religion, and are practicing it. At a push, maybe even for sixth form girls. It's highly disturbing to see 10 year old girls dressed in these clothes though, seems to me taking away the freedom of children who should be able to okay freely and not care about dress and modesty.
    I don't think parents base their religious convictions on the stock held by their local John Lewis.

    Boys and girls already have different uniforms for no good reason. There is better justification for this than for that, I think.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophiaLDN)
    Wow some of these comments. Why do you all think everyone is forced into wearing a hijab? No way would someone willingly wear it huh? :rolleyes:

    Speaking of children; If parents want their child to wear a Hijab or a turban, they are free to do so as that's their child. They will practice their religion how they please. Who are you to tell them they can't?
    What child would willingly wear a hijab? They're terribly unfashionable.

    I think the point is though, the child isn't old enough to understand the beliefs of a religion, so parents wanting their child to practise Islam by wearing a hijab is indoctrination really. The child does not truly understand the symbolism of the hijab, the set of beliefs she is unwittingly condoning. It's the same as if a parent buys their child a T-shirt with 'UKIP FTW' on it - it's just wrong to use children as tools for spreading religious/political ideas.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by callmemorbid)
    of course, but surely the reverse can be argued? ie a white muslim in an atheist family would have difficulty wanting to wear a hijab for example (i know this would be much less likely). its not in many cases, at least not in england. however, i will agree with the cultural part- i feel many people that wear hijab just do it because they feel like "they have to" - they havent really understood the religion behind it. personally i wore the hijab when i started yr7 because i knew i would at some point in my life anyway, so may as well just do it when im starting secondary school as it would be easier.
    Of course it's the same, although I have good reasons for thinking that the average girl living in a household that strictly follows one of the Abrahamic religions – Christianity, Judaism, Islam – has less control over what she wears than the average girl in an atheist family (her race obviously has nothing to do with it), and that that's not a good thing in my opinion. See below in any case.
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Of course you could tell them their decisions are wrong if that's what you think. Equally, they might tell you that your decisions are wrong. But it doesn't mean that either of you have to listen to each other.
    Of course that's the case, but it's not very useful here: if our opinions only matter when others have to listen to them, we wouldn't be having this discussion. I have an opinion that I believe to be superior to yours, and that's why I'm sharing it with you.
    In any case, could you clarify what it is exactly that you're suggesting?
    Yes this criticism if definitely fair, as the original point of this thread was to discuss John Lewis's decision to sell the hijab to schoolgirls in one of its stores and I don't think I've touched on that at all. I don't mind John Lewis selling the hijab as part of a school uniform since the rules on what pupils can and can't wear are equal.
    Is it that all children should have the final word on what they wear to school, and that I should have been allowed to go in my pyjamas?
    No.
    Or are you singling out the hijab as the item of clothing that children should have autonomy over, because it's objectively different from every other item of clothing in some way?
    I am singling out the hijab, because it is objectively different from the vast majority of other pieces of clothing for the following reasons: it's a religious item of clothing (or at least a cultural one with strong roots in religion); it's a more visible sign of one's faith – and covers more of the body – than just about any other religious garment; it's unusual in that it is only girls (and not boys) who wear it; it has caused more controversy in the UK than any other single piece of clothing, possibly because of scale (there are more Muslims living in the UK than members of any other religion apart from Christians, and for a number of reasons Islam gets lots of press in British media).

    The hijab (and to a far greater extent the niqab) is also associated in the minds of many with the oppression of female Muslims, and this is the real reason why we're having this debate. I think you think that the hijab is like any other piece of clothing; I disagree. It isn't really relevant that there are a significant number of misogynistic verses in the Quran, as that is the case for the Old and New Testaments as well (although I would consider the Quran to be a more misogynistic text than the Bible or Torah).

    The problem is in the implementation of that teaching, or in other words how Muslim girls and women are treated today. Having never grown up in a Muslim household I don't want to cast aspersions, but I will just quote one of Muhammad Ali's daughters:

    When we finally arrived, the chauffeur escorted my younger sister, Laila, and me up to my father's suite. As usual, he was hiding behind the door waiting to scare us. We exchanged many hugs and kisses as we could possibly give in one day.
    My father took a good look at us. Then he sat me down on his lap and said something that I will never forget. He looked me straight in the eyes and said, "Hana, everything that God made valuable in the world is covered and hard to get to. Where do you find diamonds? Deep down in the ground, covered and protected. Where do you find pearls? Deep down at the bottom of the ocean, covered up and protected in a beautiful shell. Where do you find gold? Way down in the mine, covered over with layers and layers of rock. You've got to work hard to get to them."

    He looked at me with serious eyes. "Your body is sacred. You're far more precious than diamonds and pearls, and you should be covered too."

    Source: Taken from the book: More Than A Hero: Muhammad Ali's Life Lessons Through His Daughter's Eyes.
    This, in a nutshell, is what I don't like about the Muslim view of women that leads to girls covering up their bodies to various extents: it promotes the idea that they need to be protected and hidden, because they're beautiful and fragile. Why is the female body more "sacred" than the male? Why does Ali only describe the female body as "hard to get to", and not the male?

    Muslim women are no more or less beautiful than any other women in the world. I would want all British girls to be taken for who they are – physical body included – because they are no more or less precious than anyone else. That's real feminism for you.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lamp-y)
    Of course that's the case, but it's not very useful here: if our opinions only matter when others have to listen to them, we wouldn't be having this discussion. I have an opinion that I believe to be superior to yours, and that's why I'm sharing it with you.
    Certainly; I'm just saying that this isn't a reason why John Lewis is in the wrong for selling hijabs, or that the state is wrong for allowing them to be worn in schools, or that parents are in the wrong for requiring their children to wear them. Obviously you can voice whatever opinion you like.


    I am singling out the hijab, because it is objectively different from the vast majority of other pieces of clothing for the following reasons: it's a religious item of clothing (or at least a cultural one with strong roots in religion); it's a more visible sign of one's faith – and covers more of the body – than just about any other religious garment; it's unusual in that it is only girls (and not boys) who wear it; it has caused more controversy in the UK than any other single piece of clothing, possibly because of scale (there are more Muslims living in the UK than members of any other religion apart from Christians, and for a number of reasons Islam gets lots of press in British media).

    The hijab (and to a far greater extent the niqab) is also associated in the minds of many with the oppression of female Muslims, and this is the real reason why we're having this debate. I think you think that the hijab is like any other piece of clothing; I disagree. It isn't really relevant that there are a significant number of misogynistic verses in the Quran, as that is the case for the Old and New Testaments as well (although I would consider the Quran to be a more misogynistic text than the Bible or Torah).
    These might all be reasons why you don't like the hijab, what it represents etc. but it's not really a reason why it should be different to any other item of clothing, in the sense of whether or not it is acceptable for parents to make the decision as to whether or not their daughters should wear them.

    You've already acknowledged the fact that when it comes to clothing, it is not unreasonable for the parents' choice to override that of the child - as in the case with me and my pyjamas. But then a principle like that cannot halt just because, in one particular case, you disagree with the parents' choice. You're at perfect liberty to dislike the hijab and think that it's the wrong choice, but that on its own doesn't now mean that actually, it's the child's choice that should supersede that of the parent.

    If you acknowledge that a particular decision lies in someone else's hands, you can't just revoke that acknowledgement as soon as you find a situation where you disagree with their decision. It you only think it's their decision, as long as they agree with you, then it's not really their decision at all.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    These might all be reasons why you don't like the hijab, what it represents etc. but it's not really a reason why it should be different to any other item of clothing, in the sense of whether or not it is acceptable for parents to make the decision as to whether or not their daughters should wear them.

    You've already acknowledged the fact that when it comes to clothing, it is not unreasonable for the parents' choice to override that of the child - as in the case with me and my pyjamas. But then a principle like that cannot halt just because, in one particular case, you disagree with the parents' choice. You're at perfect liberty to dislike the hijab and think that it's the wrong choice, but that on its own doesn't now mean that actually, it's the child's choice that should supersede that of the parent.

    If you acknowledge that a particular decision lies in someone else's hands, you can't just revoke that acknowledgement as soon as you find a situation where you disagree with their decision. It you only think it's their decision, as long as they agree with you, then it's not really their decision at all.
    Does it never stop being the parents' decision? What if they decide to dress their children in clothes made of thorns (for want of a better example)?

    I don't think we really disagree: I think that Muslim parents should be allowed to dress their daughters in the hijab, although I don't like the hijab for the reasons I've already given.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lamp-y)
    Does it never stop being the parents' decision? What if they decide to dress their children in clothes made of thorns (for want of a better example)?
    I wouldn't say that it never stops being the parents' decision. If a parent is inflicting lasting physical damage to their child, then I'd say that social services should intervene. This is objectively harmful for a child. A hijab, or a religious symbol is not; most of that comes down to subjective interpretations of what it "means". As far as objective reality goes, it's just a piece of cloth.

    However, if a parent was making their daughter wear a hijab, even though they were getting too hot under it in a certain climate and damaging their health, or if they were allergic to the material (for example), then I would say that the choice ought not to rest with that parent.

    I don't think we really disagree: I think that Muslim parents should be allowed to dress their daughters in the hijab, although I don't like the hijab for the reasons I've already given.
    Okay. I was under the impression that you believe it is wrong for parents to be the ones to have the final decision when it comes to whether or not their child wears the hijab, and that the decision ought to lie with the child themselves.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I wouldn't say that it never stops being the parents' decision. If a parent is inflicting lasting physical damage to their child, then I'd say that social services should intervene. This is objectively harmful for a child. A hijab, or a religious symbol is not; most of that comes down to subjective interpretations of what it "means". As far as objective reality goes, it's just a piece of cloth.

    However, if a parent was making their daughter wear a hijab, even though they were getting too hot under it in a certain climate and damaging their health, or if they were allergic to the material (for example), then I would say that the choice ought not to rest with that parent.
    It all depends on what you mean by "allow". If we're talking about when the state should intervene, then I agree it should only be when the parents are harming their child in a physical sense (if we're only talking about clothing; I also believe the state should intervene in the case of emotional damage). But I think there are some pieces of clothing that parents should not make their child wear, such as t-shirts with inflammatory political messages on them or very revealing clothing, and I would hope that societal pressure does enough to counter that kind of thing. Then comes the hijab, which I do not like to see anybody wearing, but which the parents should be entitled to make their children wear.
    I was under the impression that you believe it is wrong for parents to be the ones to have the final decision when it comes to whether or not their child wears the hijab, and that the decision ought to lie with the child themselves.
    Well yes: I'd certainly prefer it to be the decision of the girl. Do you disagree?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Please, John Lewis, you are better than this. I cannot think of what will happen if they do this in my local store, makes me shiver.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snagprophet)
    Its curious because it's not a religious requirement. Also no other religion does anything remotely similar.
    This is so incoorect that I've decided I've seen enough internet for one night and can finally go to sleep.

    Thankyou


    Goodnight
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lamp-y)
    Well yes: I'd certainly prefer it to be the decision of the girl. Do you disagree?
    I don't quite understand what you mean by "prefer".

    Do you mean that you would rather it was the decision of the girl, simply because you don't like the hijab, and this would probably reduce the number of hijabs being worn? Or do you mean that, in a moral sense, it ought to be the decision of the girl?


    But yes, I would disagree in both cases; firstly because I have no particular dislike of the hijab nor the rationale behind wearing one, and secondly because I don't think being made to wear one is akin to wearing clothes made of thorns, or to abuse in general, and so it ought to be the parents' decision just as much as any other normal item of clothing would be.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I wouldn't say that it never stops being the parents' decision. If a parent is inflicting lasting physical damage to their child, then I'd say that social services should intervene. This is objectively harmful for a child. A hijab, or a religious symbol is not; most of that comes down to subjective interpretations of what it "means". As far as objective reality goes, it's just a piece of cloth.

    However, if a parent was making their daughter wear a hijab, even though they were getting too hot under it in a certain climate and damaging their health, or if they were allergic to the material (for example), then I would say that the choice ought not to rest with that parent.



    Okay. I was under the impression that you believe it is wrong for parents to be the ones to have the final decision when it comes to whether or not their child wears the hijab, and that the decision ought to lie with the child themselves.
    But surely if it's meant to be worn at puberty a child knows enough at that age to decide whether they want to or not but the fact is many young girls aren't given the choice. Also a child isn't an extension of their parents they should be allowed to make their own decisions about things like this especially at 11/12. Forget puberty even at 7 years old I would have known I didn't want to wear something on my head and stand out like a sore thumb compared to other kids. The only way religion is spread is by parents indoctrinated their kids, most religious people know this and hence why they fight so hard to prevent their child actually making their own decisions in life.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I don't quite understand what you mean by "prefer".

    Do you mean that you would rather it was the decision of the girl, simply because you don't like the hijab, and this would probably reduce the number of hijabs being worn? Or do you mean that, in a moral sense, it ought to be the decision of the girl?
    The latter.
    But yes, I would disagree in both cases; firstly because I have no particular dislike of the hijab nor the rationale behind wearing one, and secondly because I don't think being made to wear one is akin to wearing clothes made of thorns, or to abuse in general, and so it ought to be the parents' decision just as much as any other normal item of clothing would be.
    I'm disappointed to hear that. I suppose it depends on the age of the child, but since we're talking about the hijab we're talking about girls who are at least 15 years old – and I'm surprised that you think that what 15+ year-olds wear "ought to be the parents' decision". I would want my children to decide what they wear once they reach puberty, and would like to think I would only step in if I felt their clothing was inappropriate – and I feel that, since not wearing the hijab is not dressing inappropriately, whether or not a girl wears the hijab should be her choice.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    I don't think parents base their religious convictions on the stock held by their local John Lewis.

    Boys and girls already have different uniforms for no good reason. There is better justification for this than for that, I think.
    Can you elaborate on that?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lamp-y)
    I'm disappointed to hear that. I suppose it depends on the age of the child, but since we're talking about the hijab we're talking about girls who are at least 15 years old – and I'm surprised that you think that what 15+ year-olds wear "ought to be the parents' decision". I would want my children to decide what they wear once they reach puberty, and would like to think I would only step in if I felt their clothing was inappropriate – and I feel that, since not wearing the hijab is not dressing inappropriately, whether or not a girl wears the hijab should be her choice.
    I also agree, that ideally a parent would in general allow their 15 year old child to wear whatever they wanted, and step in only if they felt it was inappropriate.

    Now, you don't feel that it is inappropriate to go out hijab-less, and in fact neither do I. But our opinions on that are not some kind of universal standard, they're just our opinions. So this cannot be used as a measure of whether or not going out hijab-less constitutes inappropriateness. That, I think should be left to the discretion of parents. After all, if they are stepping in to prevent the child from wearing inappropriate things, it makes no sense for the child to be the one to decide what is inappropriate and what isn't.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Please correct me if I am wrong (which I am not); no Muslim women has publicly said "Save me from the hijab, I am being forced to wear it against my will". So how comes you can all intervene? It is none of your business what they do or if they decide that they want to be covered up. A parent makes decisions in the best interest of their child until the child is of age (21) and able to think for themselves and know right from wrong. It is not your obligatory right to decide what somebody wears or not, just keep your business to yourself. If it is so bad to wear a hijab then why did Angelina Joliet wear one and say that no beauty is lost when wearing one? If you was a grown up man with young daughters, would you like them showing lots of body parts that makes men want to chase them and abuse their bodies or would you rather them cover up and wait for the man that will treat her right no matter how she looks? It's not rocket science. And also, tony Blairs Step-sister Lauren booth converted to Islam, wears a hijab without being forces by her parents. If you really want to stop people's suffering and misery then go to Palestine and end the Israeli siege. Don't waste your time trying to be a keyboard warrior.
    As for John Lewis, they are a business which means that they want to make as much money as possible which would increase due to the selling of Hijabs in their store as an unbelievable amount of people around the world are Muslim. It is a simple supply and demand tactic that all business' use.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littleangel9914)
    But surely if it's meant to be worn at puberty a child knows enough at that age to decide whether they want to or not but the fact is many young girls aren't given the choice. Also a child isn't an extension of their parents they should be allowed to make their own decisions about things like this especially at 11/12. Forget puberty even at 7 years old I would have known I didn't want to wear something on my head and stand out like a sore thumb compared to other kids.
    I think, if you read the discussion I was having, it becomes clear that this is besides the point. A child might, at any age "know" whether or not they want to wear something. The issue is a case of whose decision is final, and what happens in the case of disagreement between the parent and child as to what will be worn.

    If you think that it should always be the child's decision as to what to wear, then fair enough. But then apply that principle consistently.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snagprophet)
    Its curious because it's not a religious requirement. Also no other religion does anything remotely similar.
    That's because no other religion would be "outraged" and claim racial discrimination and abuse if they didn't.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I also agree, that ideally a parent would in general allow their 15 year old child to wear whatever they wanted, and step in only if they felt it was inappropriate.

    Now, you don't feel that it is inappropriate to go out hijab-less, and in fact neither do I. But our opinions on that are not some kind of universal standard, they're just our opinions. So this cannot be used as a measure of whether or not going out hijab-less constitutes inappropriateness. That, I think should be left to the discretion of parents. After all, if they are stepping in to prevent the child from wearing inappropriate things, it makes no sense for the child to be the one to decide what is inappropriate and what isn't.
    Ok, I think I agree with just about everything in that post, so let's end this debate.

    My feelings: I don't like what the hijab represents; John Lewis have a right to sell hijabs to schoolgirls; all teenage girls should be given as much freedom to choose how to dress as possible (and only stopped when parents consider their clothing to be inappropriate), but Muslim parents should not be prevented by the state from making their daughters wear the hijab.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 20, 2014
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.