Muslim girl sues Abercrombie & Fitch, says she wasn't hired because of her hijab

Ladies and gentlemen, your tax dollars at work. Is ACORN behind this?

Didn't Abercrombie & Fitch go through this once before? I seem to recall their name in a suit like this a few years ago.

Ah, no; 'twas this one I see, a "race and sex" lawsuit: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/17/national/17settle.html

What the hell; might as go whole hog and included a covered woman to complete the morphed, PC, image foisted upon you, A&F.

The real lesson in all this is, why bother creating a company with employees at all? Too much trouble; too much governmental interference (through which, as we can see, Muslims make their inroads).

Sure wish we didn't have to CAIR so much....

What's next? Will Muslims require we hire them even if they insist on wearing a burka no matter what the company policy on dress is?

It is an undue hardship for non-Muslims to have to endure working beside those who, whatever their outward demeanor, apparently wish to be identified as Muslims, which means they wish to declare to the world that they think the Qur'an is the uncreated and immutable Word of God, that the Hadith and Sira constitute the indispensable gloss on that Qur'an, and that Muhammad -- he of the Banu Qurayza decapitations, the Khaybar Oasis attack, the delight in the killing of Asma bint Marwan, the consummated marriage to nine-year-old Aisha, and much more -- is the Model of Conduct, uswa hasana, the Perfect Man, al-insan al-kamil. Knowing that, what non-Muslim can rest easy with Muslim co-workers? And with such co-workers, think of how carefully one will have to watch what one says or does, for fear of a CAIR-prompted lawsuit. It is cruel to non-Muslim employees to force them to work under such unsettling and permanently disturbing conditions. And then, there is always the worry -- if Sura 9.29 and 9.5 are indeed taken seriously, if there is a case of Sudden Jihad Syndrome, who will pay the price? Why should non-Muslims have to worry about that, as they go to work?

Personally, I hate Abercrombie & Fitch. I never thought I'd actually side with them in something.

Same age as Rifqa and such a GOOD Muslim girl. Sigh...
Her momm(ies) and daddy must be proud.

Out here in California it is not uncommon to see Muslim women wearing a headscarf, and skin tight pants.

It is not clear to me if wearing a headscarf is a religious obligation, or only to "show modesty".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab

At any rate, when ever CAIR is involved, you can be sure it will turn into "a Federal case".

More hijab nonsense -

http://www.justicenewsflash.com/2009/08/28/michigan-judge-sued-removal-hijab-court_200908282011.html

http://www.aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=7941&posts=3

http://muslimmatters.org/2008/12/17/outrageous-muslim-woman-lisa-valentine-jailed-for-hijab-contempt-in-georgia/

religiously mandated head scarf....

Not true. It says nothing about dressing like a bank robber to be 'dressed modestly'.

I would hazard a guess that the many misunderstanders of islam are misunderstanding another aspect of their cult.

Why would such a devout girl want to be surrounded by pictures of half naked models? Sounds like another deliberate attempt at clashing civilizations.

Positive note:

Helmsley Hotel in NYC ousts conference featuring the Holocaust denying Thug in Chief, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Read it all here:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/jad_gets_heave_ho_from_helmsley_nIJbRjyo9FqI7FhHe5SM3O

An Iranian student group had booked the space months ago, said Howard Rubenstein, spokesman for Helmsley Properties.

"As soon as Helmsley corporate management learned of the possibility of either the Iranian Mission or President Ahmadinejad holding a function at the New York Helmsley Hotel, they immediately ordered the cancellation of that function," Rubenstein said.

"Neither the Iranian Mission nor President Ahmadinejad is welcome at any Helmsley facility. The Helmsley organization is grateful to United Against Nuclear Iran for bringing this matter to its attention so that appropriate action could be taken."

If you wear the Hijab, you cant get a job at the Woodland Hills, Ok. Abercrombie & Fitch. It all comes from the "Look". Apparently, A&F has a standard for appearance, and orthodox Muslims in Hijabs (or burtkahs for that matter), don't have the Abercrombie "Look".

Look for the ACLU and CAIR to double team this one, using legal arguments from old flight attendant and Hooters cases. Our only hope is that this happened in Ok. If it happened in the 9th circuit in Ca. A&F would be a sure loser.

Who would have ever thought that the dull-eyed empty heads at Abercrombie, who brought us soft porn billboards and sullen clerks, would end up having more backbone and sense than average Starbucks Loathsome Latte Lapper that infests our legal and governmental system (and malls).

Abercrombie and Fitch?

Poetcomic stated:

"Her momm(ies) and daddy must be proud."

Samantha Elauf & her parents present their case of 'modesty' consciousness with their demand to wear a hijab if employed. Do they seriously believe they will convince a court this gal's religious modesty is an issue at A&F?

Take a gander at A&F marketing images

LOL! Go ahead, pull the other one!

The brilliant Feminist Phyllis Chesler is OK'ing the hijab. Just letting everyone know. Here's the link to her recent article:

http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/09/14/hijab-the-headscarf-maybe-yes-burqa-no/

what next? a muslim girl wearing nijab who sue Hooters because they didn't hire her?

This reminds me eerily of a UK case that we discussed here at jihadwatch some time ago: a Muslim girl (in hijab) applied for a job with a hairdresser. Her insistence that she would wear the hijab on the job (whereas a requirement of being employed by that particular hairdresser was for employees to be willing to work with their hair uncovered and displaying the House Style - same issue as A & F - it's all about The Look) meant she didn't get the job. So she sued.

Lawfare. Stealth Jihad. I would bet good money that this little be-hijabbed Muslimah in the USA, like the Muslimah in the UK, knew d*mn well that she would be turned down for the job, because of her insistence on wearing hijab in a place of employment that is by nature incompatible with same. And that this (suitably massaged) would give her the excuse to sue...and soak the Infidels.

Sounds like a setup to me, like the Muslim woman in the UK who sued that poor salon owner who wanted employees to show their hair at work (to demonstrate the latest hair styles and colors).

I have been waited on by headscarf-wearing clerks at my local Old Navy, Target, and other stores and personally have had no issue with it. However, anyone who knows anything about Abercrombie and Fitch is aware that they are all about their image--to a greater extent than even the average retailer--and that image is "sex sells." (Their catalogs verge on pornographic, at least of the soft-core variety.) If I had a teen daughter, even as a non-Muslim and not particularly religious person I wouldn't want her working at A&F for that very reason. There are literally dozens of other clothing stores, including stores for teens, this young lady could apply to which would have no problem with her religious garb, and no doubt she knows it.

Last time I looked there was no requirement to hire anyone. If the employer doesn't like your shoes or anything else they can forgo hiring you. This is a crock.

Honestly,
These muslim women have so much to say for themselves when it comes to the trivial matter of being denied a headscarf.
But the honor killings don't seem to bother them.
Woman + Islam = extreme doormat.

i wonder if Samantha is not part of a larger effort by the mosque to bring its grand reform to the forefront. by angling against this bastion of fashion that pushes the limits of common morality via its models, the mosque gets to make a complaint supporting "modesty" and "high standard," so as to shame those who show skin.

support free enterprise. ban the hijab. stop Sharia creep.

Kaffirchick, this is the incident you're refering to:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2144714/Muslim--hairdresser-awarded-4000-for-hurt-feelings-over-headscarf.html

Muslim hairdresser awarded £4,000 for 'hurt feelings' over headscarf

A Muslim teenager has been awarded £4,000 for "hurt feelings" after the owner of a hair salon refused her a job because she wears a headscarf.

An extortion racket is an extortion racket. Perhaps I should convert to Islam to get on this gravy train of trumped up discrimination. Get all you can!!!

Thanks, darcy, for the Chesler link. I've always liked her writing.

I agree with her that the wearing of hijabs should not be outlawed; niqabs & burqas, with face hidden, I feel differently about. I hate the sight of them, but value them as danger signals. It's pretty safe to assume the wearer takes Islam to heart, and that is good to know.

Dress codes are common all over the world. In lots of countries you wear traditional garments, saris in India which I deem very beautiful, African girls wear their long colourful garments etc. In banks in Western countries male clerks are supposed to wear a suit and tie. In Western clothing stores female employees are usually supposed to wear the same clothes that they have to sell, to attract female customers and display the beauty of the garments. A dress looks much nicer on a living girl than on a display dummy. So what the heck? It's only normal that you display your merchandise in the best way in order to sell it. As Western clothing stores don't sell hijabs and that sort of crap, it's not appropriate for a sales girl to wear that sort of garbage.

I can only wonder wherefrom Mohammedans get the brazenness to always try to impose their stupid, barbaric and backward way of life on the civilised world. When in Rome...

Whatever I can read overhere confirms my belief that any culture on this plane is superior to Islam.

Why would such a devout girl want to be surrounded by pictures of half naked models?

To get rid of the models by imposing Muslim standards of conduct.

Muslims are always demanding you make exceptions for them....and hiring Muslims has proven to be disasters in the making...If the Muslims want to get hired , let them make the exceptions ....

Dumbledoresarmy - there is indeed a parallel with the case of Bushrah Noah, the whining, litigious hijabette who all but bankrupted trendy hairstylist and hard-working entrepreneur Sara Desrosiers. I discuss the case in detail at Pajamas Media.

The big difference is that Abercrombie and Fitch, which sounds like a crusty old Dickensian law firm, is big enough to fight back effectively. It is also big enough to pay her off, though, without feeling it.

The coverage of this story by Tulsa World is straightforward, but that approach also plays into the "stealth jihad" agenda. Americans are blessed with many civil rights which run counter to Islamic Sharia Law.

The concept at issue in this case is the religious edict that requires covering of female Muslims even when they are in public and not just at worship. (See Reliance of the Traveler, paragraph m2.3) But the same paragraph says that it is unlawful for a man to look at a woman who is not his wife or one of his unmarriageable kin. The veil only takes care of part of the requirement. Later, in paragraph m2.6, it says a woman may not look at a man other than her husband or unmarriageable kin. So in strict accordance with Sharia Law, this young woman should not be working in a public place where strangers will look at her and where she must look at strangers.

What "stealth jihad" is doing is insisting that certain religious mandates be followed while ignoring other mandates which would render the case moot. Another case (in Great Britain) had to do with medical students expelled for refusing to sterilize their hands because the soap contained alcohol. The students claimed the school violated their religious mandates. But Sharia Law only requires that Muslims not drink alcohol. The very word is an Arabic word, and alcohol was used in perfumes and other remedies since the time of Muhammad.

We will see no end to the violations of Islamic religious requirements because Sharia Law includes a thousand pages of such requirements, including the orientation of urinals. (One must not relieve himself in the direction of Mecca.) This will ultimately either frustrate the legal system or it will turn ordinary people against all this Islamic silliness.

If Samantha Elauf is sincere about getting a job, and not just serving as a probe in the "stealth jihad" agenda, there may be ways she can be accommodated by A & F. Put new hires on a commission basis or hire several applicants on probation giving the permanent job to the one who outperforms the others. I sincerely believe that anyone who is so focused on his or her religion (whatever religion it may be) that every move and act is governed by some religious requirement will not perform well as a salesperson or in whatever job he or she is hired for. In this case, if a Samantha can follow all the Muslim requirements and still bring in significant business for her employer, then she should be given a permanent job.

I don't doubt that CAIR has had ties to terrorists and Islamic supremacists, and that its leaders or some of them are would-be Islamic totalitarians themselves. But what does it really mean to be an "unindicted co-conspirator"? Why were they not indicted? It may suggest there was not enough evidence to convict, mayn't it? Here is one explanation, though I don't know how accurate it is:

An unindicted co-conspirator is a person or entity that is alleged in an indictment to have engaged in conspiracy, but who is not charged in the same indictment. Prosecutors choose to name persons as unindicted co-conspirators for a variety of reasons including grants of immunity, pragmatic considerations, and evidentiary concerns.

The United States Attorneys' Manual generally recommends against naming unindicted co-conspirators, although their use is not generally prohibited by law or policy.

epistemology stated:

"In Western clothing stores female employees are usually supposed to wear the same clothes that they have to sell"

Locally (NE USA), A&F requires all new hires, whether they are employed on the sales floor or in the back, to purchase (w/discount) A&F clothing to wear while on the job.

It is long past time for the West to prejudicially discriminate against Muslims. Not against anyone else, not against any other minority. Only against Muslims.

Enough already.

All Muslims are evil and dangerous.

"Defendant refused to hire Ms. Elauf because she wears a hijab, claiming that the wearing of headgear was prohibited by its Look Policy, and, further, failed to accommodate her religious beliefs by making an exception to the Look Policy," the lawsuit states.

Who gives a rat's arse over her personal beliefs, and why should anyone make an exception for her? Who is she to be so exceptional? She's a nobody hailing from a belligerent cultish belief-system demanding special treatment. There is no case here, it should be thrown out as frivolous, and dismissed. End the Muslim demands now and for all time. They're nobodies. That goes for CAIR too, useless parasites, nobodies.

If you find a muslim coming to an interview with hijab, there were lots of smooth ways to get rid of her/ him. Well firt it will be the headscarf, then the hijab, then the foot baths, then the toilets, ooh the prayer room. Then the models on display in the showroom have to cover up. Hee haw this is too much, hiring a muslim is dangerous to health and wealth. These stupid muslims dont want to work, let them religiously follow their religion on an empty stomach. Dont give into these blackmailers Abercrombie & Fitch

Companies have the right to dictate a dress code. She can get a job somewhere else.

Soon we could see a lawsuit brought by a Christian female who applies to a Muslim business only to be not hired because she doesn't dress like a Muslim or because she just isn't a Muslim....

Let's see ...

Um ... sexed up fashion spot.

7th century, puritanical bag over the head rig.

What could possibly be wrong with that?

Can you spell M-O-R-O-N?

Mohammedan supremacism in action.

Brought to us by the traitorous idiots of the US gov't no less.

I think I will start a religion were people must always wear denim.
Maybe then I can sue my boss for not letting us wear jeans at the office.

I'll just make it up as I go along. Everytime I do something other people don't like I'll just go into a trance and tell them God told me to do it.
Then I'll throw in a few verses from already established religions taken totally out of context to lend it all an air of credabilty.

Total set-up. That girl and her parents do not want her working at A and F.
And I feel the same-- do not endorse the sexy high-priced clothing for my children, but stand behind them 100%. This is a Muslim test -- amd we all know here, and from watching Europe -- they will continue testing us until they rule us.

BUT WE WILL STOP THEM!

Curious -- When stories like this pop up, do Robert and others in the know like him contact A and F directly to help them? I'm thinking there are lots of lawyers in the dark about stealth jihad and could use some backing for their case.

Is it just the hijab or the full gear? Not that it matters to CAIR...CAIR probably put her up to it, as their business is slow these days and money is in demand. It would be nice to see them once be honest...but lying to infidels is a characteristic of islam and beings we're not muslim, we have to pay jyzia. However, they will never win in the long run as Americans love their freedom.

It would be interesting to see a Muslim applying at Hooters
for a job as a waitress.

Unveiled

Good idea. Only problem - you didn't live in the 7th century, otherwise, you could have done all that and more, and today, you'd have some billions worshipping you, and living and breathing by your rules.

I sometimes wish we could time travel, capture Mohammed, bring him here to today's West, and then see how much fun he has trying to write his rules. He'd probably end up like David Koresh.

Let's see what happens when Americans apply for jobs at Muslim owned businesses.For example;If I were Jewish and I applied for a waiters job at an Iranian restaurant,a Muslim owned business,if they didn't accommodate me by giving me Friday nights off to pray or Saturdays off to attend a synagogue,can I sue them?

abercrombie should not be a place for a Muslim girl to work.
Most of the Muslims I know don't want to shop in this store because they think they are immoral....

The next step is force Abercrombie to sell only black hijabs. WOW! what a line of style and beauty!

The people opened a case on behalf of EEOC against Abercrombie, The charge: Denying the right to wear a hijab. Is Abercrombie Guilty or not? Join in and see what the pople think http://bit.ly/AllRise259 AllRise.com Community Court