Maysan Haydar’s philosophy Essay Example

her personality and mind. Haydar stated that, it absolved me of the need to be wanted soley for my looks (Haydar 261). This claim arouses envy from the female audience, because there’s a high chance that those who do not veil had to worry about their appearance for the sake of others. She gave personal anecdotes, for example; when she discusses that when she attended high school, she had meaningful friendships because of the hijab (Haydar 261). She used a more emotional approach and vivid descriptions when describing her childhood experiences. which made it easy for her reading audience to put themselves in her shoes.

The claim makes us wonder, what if we had veiled too? Would those who did not veil have gone through high school without those pesky dating games and damaging experiences? Her anecdote had us imagine a different reality by head-covering and persuaded us to take her side on the subject at hand. She gave off a more sensitive tone when it came to her next claim, which is that veiling is not an oppressive tool set out by men (Haydar 260). Haydar as a feminist was offended, shocked, and disappointed that the public’s notion in general is that veiling is a forced practice. She states that it’s hypocritical that women who do not veil, believe in that notion. When aren't the non-veiled women following oppressive practices, to spend millions of dollars on surgery, self-help books and beauty products to improve their appearance for men? By raising that question, she elicits anger, frustration from her female readers and has them ponder that maybe they are really the ones who are being oppressed

by the male population. Non -veiled women are the ones who feel caged up by societies beauty expectations and who are doing everything to perfect their appearance for the male gender. While the females who cover up are enjoying the veils modesty by not having to spend too much on makeup, extreme regimes and self-help guides for their appearance. Nussbaum’s article did a great job at persuading her audience to not ban burqas from public areas by using logos as a strategy. She used several statistics and quotations from reliable sources, which made it easier for the reader to take her side of the argument. Her audience seemed to mostly include politicians and American voters.

They are really the ones who can make the change to eradicate the ban of wearing head scarves. As a philosophy teacher and author of a religious equality book Nussbaum is viewed as someone who is aware and knowledgeable on religious practices and laws. Which has the audience trust her as a credible source, therefore, has the audience believing in what she addresses. For example, her first claim was that the United States constitution protects all equal rights (Nussbaum). One of those rights being, “free exercise of religion” which means we have the freedom to practice our religion in our own way, so long as it does not put the public in danger. She shows that she is knowledgeable on the laws and provides proof by addressing the constitution. She also gives credible sources, philosophers like Roger Williams and John Locke. They are well known philosophers and believed that all people are free. She quotes John Locke, protecting equal rights includes

“laws that do not penalize religious belief and laws that are non-discriminatory about practices” (Nussbaum). She used that quote to arise irritation from the reader, It makes her audience remember that people have the freedom to practice their religion as they choose. So, why can’t veiled women have the same rights?

Nussbaum used John Locke as a source because he influenced the world with his political views and is the reason why we have these rights, that’s why we are free. Another one of Nussbaum’s claim was that women are not forced to wear burqas by men. she supports that claim with statistics. She provides statistics from the US bureau of justice stating that when it comes to violence, “52 percent of surveyed women said they were physically assaulted as a child by an adult caretake and or as an adult by any type of perpetrator” (Nussbaum). However, there is no evidence showing that most of those women are Muslim. Nussbaum also states that some domestic violence is associated with alcohol abuse which is not the case in Muslim families because there is no alcohol consumption. With all her claims and evidence to back it up she is a very convincing author for those who believe in facts over an opinion. Haydar and Nussbaum both made their writing pieces persuasive by using ethos as a strategy. However, when it came to who was more persuasive on the subject, Nussbaum used factual data and quotes from well-known Philosophers like Roger Williams and John Locke. She also took factual date from the U.S bureau of Justice.

Haydar used humor and colorful anecdotes to make the reader feel relatable to

her; she made it easy for her audience to understand the true reasoning behind veiling. While Nussbaum does teach law and philosophy and has written several books regarding religious freedom and equality; Haydar is a Muslim female who has veiled her entire life. She has experienced firsthand the prejudices from covering up. She has been judged her entire life; she is one of many women who have been looked down on by what they wear. She has given us several emotional examples and evoked sympathy from us by taking us through a tour of her childhood, teen years, and her adulthood.

When analyzing both written materials they both had well written writings that persuaded the audience to take their side of this controversial issue. They made the reader gain a new perspective on veiling and learned the true meaning behind it. However, they both had claims that didn’t really help with persuading their audience. For example, Nussbaum used that wearing a hijab is comfortable as a claim, she went on to state that the hijab is made of cotton, keeps dust off one’s limbs and diminishes the risk of cancer (Nussbaum 7).

This was a weak claim because she does not give evidence that wearing a hijab decreases the risk of cancer and compared to the rest of her claims is seems less important when persuading her audience. Haydar was good at using pathos for her strategy but she could have used Logos, she mostly used emotional anecdotes and not enough facts. She only addressed her own personal experiences but did not include anyone else’s opinion or citations from experts. To reiterate, Nussbaum and Haydar’s persuasive works

of literature were equally strong at destroying misconceptions, changing the audiences view on veiling by using powerful strategies like Pathos and Logos.