Exceptions to a uniform defeat the purpose of having one, making the exception stand out and calling attention to it. That appears to be precisely the idea here.
It is a curious inversion of logic, also seen in the story about prayer spaces at the Catholic University of America, and the prayer break dispute with Hertz: Refusing to discriminate in Muslim complainants' favor on those matters is discriminating against them.
"Muslim Girl Wants Army to Bend Its Rules Just for Her," from The Stir, October 21:
When you envision signing up for the US Army, what's the picture that comes to mind? Green fatigues and dress blues that match your fellow soldiers? Or wearing any darn thing you please?
The military is pretty well known for requiring uniformity in uniforms. So news that a Muslim teenager has been told she can't wear her headscarf when she marches with her high school's junior ROTC, a youth offshoot of the Army, isn't terribly surprising. And it's not discrimination either.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations has come out to say that Demin Zawity, a 14-year-old cadet from Tennessee, has been treated unfairly because her ROTC commander told her she couldn't wear her traditional headscarf with her uniform if she wanted to march in a homecoming parade with the rest of the cadets. Although they didn't call it Islamophobia, the undertones of their complaints are clear: they think the Army needs to change its rules.
But ROTC regulations do allow for the headscarves worn by Muslim women for religious reasons to be worn, so long as they're "completely covered by standard military headgear." She wasn't told no. She was told "yes, but ... "
But Zawity wanted a special dispensation -- something that takes time to make its way through the proper channels -- and she only learned her scarf was inappropriate the day before the parade.
Or so she says.
It's not that I think she's lying, per se. But as a Muslim American who wears her headscarf on a daily basis, I find it hard to believe that this is the first time Zawity was ever faced with the notion that some people don't wear headscarves. As a 14-year-old, I'm finding it hard to believe that she can't fathom the concept of "uniforms."
There are dozens, maybe hundreds of jobs that are known for requiring their employees to match. She has to have seen police officers, chefs, nurses, basketball players ... the list could go on. But in particular, Zawity chose to join a military organization, where the uniform rules are widely known for being stringent.
Join the Army -- or in this case, the ROTC -- and you pledge to live by their rules. She signed up for that, not the other way around.
This is the demarcation between what represents discrimination in this country and what allows for the freedoms we so enjoy as Americans. We all have the right to take a job that carries strict rules for its employees or join an organization with specific expectations, and we all have the right to say, "You know, that job isn't for me."
Liberal teenagers don't join the Young Republicans. Evangelical kids don't join the Gay/Straight Alliance. It's all about choice, something we as Americans are lucky to have.
This Muslim teenager chose to join an organization that accepted her, and gave her an ability to merge her religious background with their strict standards. She, in turn, asked for special treatment. That doesn't mean she's been discriminated against. It means she picked the wrong organization to join.
Common sense from a mahoundian? Well whaddaya know!
I was referring to the author of the article, not to the teenager.
Islam is BUILT on the inversion of logic.
Everyone needs to stop being confused. I know I'm not. I see through the 'Dawa'.
First they try to confound you....
The wording is awkward, but I don't think the author is a Muslim. It's when she uses the same phrase structure for "As a 14-year-old" that it becomes clearer that she is referring to the girl, and not herself.
It is a curious inversion of logic.
We have a lotta that going around nowadays. Usually the inversion is allowed to proceed in through lawlessness on the part of our leaders, the judges and the insane mob that goes to work every day on Capitol Hill.
*** Tabari 8:182 ***
The people assembled in Mecca to swear allegiance to Mohammed in submission. He received from them the oath of allegiance to himself, to heed and obey.
The thing I'm curious about here is why would the authorities ever permit a Moslem to join ROTC, much less the military or a police force of any kind.
What would be wrong with a buzz cut and a swim cap? Problem solved.
Marisol, I was going on this from the author of the article:
"But as a Muslim American who wears her headscarf on a daily basis, I find it hard to believe that this is the first time Zawity was ever faced with the notion that some people don't wear headscarves."
It seems to imply that the author is referring to herself; I guess that 'awkward wording' describes it pretty well.
"But as . . ., I" is what threw me off.
JW’ers all know well the insidious slimy slithering Jihadi supremacism we are facing.
The 'ever-so-sensitive' caving in to female weightlifters, female soccer players, among others: And drum roll please - recently the Toronto Police disclosed that they actively searched for a hijab-wearing Muslimah to join the force.
Q: What happens if she’s first to respond to a Major Nidal Malik Hasan-style or other sudden jihadi syndrome shooting?
“Oooops, sorry folks, I can’t shoot a fellow Muslim, especially while all he’s doing is being busy killing infidels! Hmmm, maybe I can help him reload.”
/sarc
Dave
WE ARE AT WAR!
If she can't wear her slave covering, how can she carry her suicide bomb?
Hi CGW, that's the way I read it too and then marveled that the lady writing the article could be a card carrying Muslim and so open minded about her American freedoms.
The thing that I find ironic here is that time and time again we see CAIR instigating friction in order to promote the rights of Muslim women to appear Muslim in fields that they would never be allowed to engage in in any Middle Eastern hellhole they come from. So it looks to me like a two-fer for CAIR, again. They get to appear to be promoting the rights of women (while telling everyone who will listen that Islam doesn't oppress women) and furthering the spread of Islam that will ultimately imprison women in their homes and prevent them from ever joining ROTC, the military, the police force or any sports usually reserved for guys. I'm not sure if these women are useful idiots or scared out of their wits if they don't pitch a fit according to CAIR's specifications.
Remember Fort Hood.
The fewer Moslems in the military the better. http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/muslim-subversion-sedition-and-social.html
I'm just waiting for the first time a muslim major league baseball player says he wants to wear his keffiyeh instead of the regulation uniform cap, and CAIR screams discrimination and islamohobia. You know it's coming....
I had to read that twice, too.
Does she want to be identified primarily as Muslim then secondly as US military? If she is forced to choose in a possible conflict between loyalty to the umma (muslim nation) and loyalty to country, which one will she choose?
Why not demand the "right" to march in drag?
If she wants to join the army in a hijab, there are many she can choose from in the Arab/Muslim world.
I find the accomodation offered by the JROTC unit to be extremely generous since participation in JROTC is completely voluntary and places no binding obligation on either the military or the student.
Apparently that is still not good enough for this girl. She needs to study up on Army history and learn how the Sikhs were stripped of their priviledge to wear their turbans, shave their beards and bring their hair & mustaches into compliance with Army regulation back in the 1980s. Mennonite soldiers are also required to meet Army uniform standards. So are Jews, Mormons, Pentacostals, Roman Catholics, Pagans, Hindus, Bhuddists, Wiccans and all other denominations.
Here is an excerpt from Army Regulation 670-1. Section 1-7 reads, in part, that:
"(2) Soldiers may wear religious headgear while in uniform if the headgear meets the following criteria.
(a) It must be subdued in color (black, brown, green, dark or navy blue, or a combination of these colors).
(b) It must be of a style and size that can be completely covered by standard military headgear, and it cannot interfere with the proper wear or functioning of protective clothing or equipment.
(c) The headgear cannot bear any writing, symbols, or pictures.
(d) Personnel will not wear religious headgear in place of military headgear when military headgear is required
(outdoors, or indoors when required for duties or ceremonies)."
Parades are ceremonial functions.
Also see http://www.4militarywomen.org/AND_Hajib_letter.pdf wherein concerns regarding the wear of the hijab by female US soldiers in combat zones was addressed a few years ago.
Note: I understand that there are 2 Sikhs currently serving who have been granted a partial exemption from these regulations. Both of them are in skills that the Army is critically short of. IIRC, one is a doctor and the other is a dentist. In each case, both of them will probably be kept back from the front lines due to the equipment they need to ply their trades.
That Little Princess in Tennessee better get some job skills that make her valuable enough for the Army to entertain the idea of possibly giving her an exemption.....but after the FT Hood massacre, I don't think they'll be in a big hurry to hire another militant muslim or muslima. She's got Major Hassan to thank for that! Maybe Little Princess and CAIR ought to consider suing Hassan instead of the school!
This will just make it easier to shoot her in the back during a fire-fight before she turns around to fire on her american troops or toss a grenade because she refuses to fight other muslims.
Just toss her body close to the front line and face her away from the battle as if she was fleeing
as a coward....this would be believed , case closed.
I know that CAIR will play both sides to defend the hijab in battle and then claim the military didn't do enough to stop the muslim females form being killed as the enemy saw a better target with a pink Hijab and stopped to face Mekkah and pray.
Just try to get a job in a Mosque and tell muslims that you can't follow their cult rules and wear costumes and chants at a rock 12'000 miles away or have your daughter
visit you but must enter the sub-human door for females.
Islam in the west appears to be heading to a slow death
as people wake-up to the mass-slauhgters outside of the USA and the silence by CAIR to condemn them.
CAIR was more obesssed by the paranoia-driven islamophobia
they fabricated then the 3000 cicilains murdered by 19 muslims, in fact.....I still want Hooper to tell me exactly how many non-muslims must be slaughterd by his brave brothers before we can be allowed to have some oputrage and well-founded fear of islam and the islamists????
CAIR does not talk about the 25'000+ civilians that fled the 2nd Tower in fear of a 2nd plane which did come.
So ,would 30'000 deaths of infidels allow me to question islams claims to being about PEACE????, because it is evil and obscene that CAIR rants on when 1 muslim female has an issue about the Hijab , but 30'000 dead non-muslims on 9/11 would not have changed their weak response to deny islam and muslims were tied to the mass-slaughter.
Image a 747 being hijacked in saudi Arabia by an infidel that flies it into he Kaaba rock during haaj and slaughters 2000 muslims........would CAIR be asking for calm and then endorse a Synagague or Church to be build in Mekkah to show tolerance because 6 billion non-muslims should not be scapegoats for the actions of a misunderstander of the peaceful non-muslims?????
Mot a chance, that would be Driving Miss Daisy Kahn crazy and into a rage to get even and cry islamophobia to punish all 6 billion infidels as a threat to islams Peace and call for the mass slaughter by asking each muslim to kill 6 infidels for Allah because of the 747 attack in mekkah.
Just goes to show that grammar IS important. This kind of mistake is so common now; and very annoying, as it means you have to read it again and puzzle it out. But I learned grammar so long ago that I have forgotten what this mistake is called. The sentence should read, "But as she is a Muslim American who wears the headscarf on a daily basis, I find it hard to believe that..."
Why would a Muslim, regardless of gender or age, want to join any branch of the U.S. military? To infiltrate it. To bring it down. To make it submit. To enfeeble it, to emasculate it. To corrupt it from inside. Those are the only purposes a Muslim would join the U.S. military. Stealth jihadists exploit legislated political correctness in this instance to not deny women the same chance in the military as men (and Bill Clinton, who hated the military almost as much as does Obama, pushed for a gender neutral military force in both his terms). So, now there are women on naval vessels, as Air Force pilots, a woman commands Paris Island, and the military-hating liberals pushing for women on submarines, all with "separate but equal" but costly accommodations. None of which stops women from becoming pregnant among the ranks, none of which prevents sex scandals from occurring in such close quarters. Which, of course, taxpayers are given to bill for.
That being said, CAIR's tears for the ROTC Muslim are pure crocodile, given Islam’s view of women. CAIR is not particularly concerned about the Muslim girl; its purpose is to exact submission from the ROTC.
*I'm* curious as to exactly who instigated this nonsense. I think it very unlikely a *14 year old* would come up with this off her own bat. Somebody, (can't think who, sarc/off) has an agenda here.
Interesting.. If I recall correctly, I didn't have the option as to what I chose to wear when I joined the military at the ripe old age of 17... or Air Cadets some 5 years before that when I was 12. The whole point of a uniform is that it is UNIFORM. Males, Females, Caucasian or other, it doesn't matter when you join the military - you are in the military, and for all intents and purposes, they own you. Uniforms are the most visible declaration that you are part of a team, with common goals and aspirations for your country - to protect it from without and within from all threats. Other less visible things that make you part of the team are training, drill, and camaraderie. Change any one of these though, and you are no longer a member of that team - you stand out, and you are no longer "uniform" in the eyes of the military, and thus your motives may seem self serving rather than serving the common good.
Totally bogus. If she's pious enough to be concerned about showing her hair, she's too pious to be seen associating with men that are not mehram. Islam isn't pick-and-mix.
The author of the article is one Jeanne Sager. I see nothing to indicate that she herself is Muslim—I believe it was just a bit of imprecise phrasing on her part that led to the confusion.