In FrontPage today I discuss Sharia advocate Dalia Mogahed’s recent appearance on the Daily Show, where she endeavored to explain why Islamic oppression of women is, hey, really cool.
Dalia Mogahed, formerly Barack Obama’s adviser on Muslim affairs, appeared on Trevor Noah’s sinking-like-a-stone Daily Show last week, to explain to a worshipful Noah and an adoring audience that the hijab represented nothing more or less than the “privatization of women’s sexuality” – and who on earth but the most benighted lout could possibly be against that? The burning outrage of Mogahed’s words was probably missed by most Daily Show viewers. It should not be missed by FrontPage readers.
“The privatization of women’s sexuality.” A well-constructed and extraordinarily clever phrase, to be sure. With it, Mogahed suggests that the only people who could possibly object to women wearing hijabs are those who want to objectify women as sexual commodities. In this, we glimpse the subtle manipulation by which Islamic supremacists such as Mogahed have co-opted and silenced feminists whom one might otherwise have expected to have stood up against the Sharia oppression of women. How can one stand with the objectifiers, the pornographers, the users, the haters, against those who simply want to “privatize” their sexuality?
The audience loved this. Noah ate it up. But there are a few audiences before whom Mogahed’s extremely clever act might not play quite as well as it did before the Daily Show. Aqsa Parvez’s Muslim father choked her to death with her hijab after she refused to wear it. Aqsa might have a few choice words for Dalia Mogahed about “privatization” of her sexuality. And then there was Amina Muse Ali, who was a Christian woman in Somalia whom Muslims murdered because she wasn’t wearing a hijab. Forty women were murdered in Iraq in 2007 for not wearing the hijab. They might wish that their sexuality had been a trifle less “privatized” – at least enough for them to be able to continue to breathe air.
Will Dalia Mogahed and Trevor Noah get together on another Daily Show episode to say a few words in memory of Aqsa, Amina, and the forty Iraqi women? Will they honor the memory of Amira, an Egyptian girl who committed suicide after being brutalized for her family for refusing to “privatize” her sexuality and wear the hijab? Will they defend the freedom of Alya Al-Safar, whose Muslim cousin threatened to kill her and harm her family because she stopped privatizing her sexuality and wearing the hijab in Britain? Will they speak up for the Saudi schoolgirls who were burnt alive because firefighters wouldn’t enter their burning school since they weren’t wearing hijab, i.e., their sexuality was insufficiently privatized?
When will we see the Daily Show episode on Amira Osman Hamid, who faces whipping in Sudan for refusing to wear the hijab? Will we hear about the sexuality privatization of the Muslim and non-Muslim teachers at the Islamic College of South Australia who were told that they had to wear the hijab or be fired? How about the women in Chechnya whom police shot with paintballs because they weren’t wearing hijab; or the women also in Chechnya who were threatened by men with automatic rifles for not wearing hijab; or the elementary school teachers in Tunisia who were threatened with death for not wearing hijab; or the Syrian schoolgirls who were forbidden to go to school unless they wore hijab; or the women in Gaza whom Hamas has forced to wear hijab; or the women in Iran who protested against the regime by daring to take off their legally-required hijab; or the women in London whom Muslim thugs threatened to murder if they didn’t wear hijab; or the anonymous young Muslim woman who doffed her hijab outside her home and started living a double life in fear of her parents? When is the Daily Show episode scheduled about the hazards that lie in the way of women who refuse to “privatize their sexuality”? When will Dalia Mogahed and Trevor Noah spare a few words for these and all the other women and girls who have been killed or threatened, or who live in fear for daring not to wear the hijab?
Dalia Mogahed has done this before. Several years ago she appeared on a British TV show sponsored by the pro-Sharia group Hizb ut-Tahrir and proclaimed: “Sharia is not well understood and Islam as a faith is not well understood.” Who has misunderstood Sharia and Islam, O Ms. Privatized Mogahed? Was it Aqsa Parvez, who might perhaps have believed the establishment codswallop about Islam being a religion of peace and tolerance long enough to think that she might survive into adulthood even while not wearing hijab? Was it any of these other women and girls who might have had a different understanding from that of Ms. Mogahed of the “privatization” of their sexuality, and didn’t deserve to have Ms. Mogahed’s view violently enforced upon them?
Mogahed added on the Hizb ut-Tahrir show that we have erroneously associated Sharia with “maximum criminal punishments” and “laws that… to many people seem unequal to women.” “Seem unequal”? The next time a young man is brutally murdered by his family to cleanse the family “honor,” call my office. Until then, the fact is undeniable: the path to Mogahed’s “privatization of women’s sexuality” is littered with the mangled bodies of those women and girls whose sexuality was deemed insufficiently privatized. For Mogahed and Noah so glibly to gloss over that fact was tantamount to dancing on their graves.

jihad3tracker says
Dalia Mogahed is the always instantly ready at the drop of a hijab Muslima for mainstream media and multicultural idiots like Trevor Noah.
She even inserted herself into participants (just-plain-everyday Allah-worshippers) in a recent multiple-segment CBS News piece on how those unfortunate-victimhood tender snowflakes are worrying about “backlash”.
AND THERE WAS, OF COURSE, NO MENTION OF THE SAN BERNARDINO SLAUGHTER OR OTHER MUSLIM ATROCITIES. The CBS website might still have a link to the Frank Lutz-led video — watch it and vomit.
She also has a consulting business based near Washington DC, and her clients would, no doubt, be truly startled if they were to receive some truth on Islam’s agenda.
MarThoma says
Her name “Mogahed” (Mujahid if you transliterate from Classical Arabic) means Jihadi… Just living up to her name.
gravenimage says
It seems you’re likely correct. Thank you for the telling translation.
Linde Barrera says
This gal, Dalia Mogahed, spreads taquiyya to an ignorant public about Islamic issues as smoothly and slickly as I spread honey on my toast. Thank you for this revealing article. A prayer for those who were killed over their hijabs, or their refusal to wear them.
David Jory says
http://www.lbc.co.uk/moment-wo…
Video of what a young lady in a hijab can do to you in London.This unprovoked attack happened on December 26th.Video released today by Police.
Response so far…not a lot. Unlike the media storm for the black guy who pushed a muslim off a bus.
This is ‘magnetic kuffar syndrome’. Some poor innocent muslim is forced by the infidel magnetism generated by kuffars to plunge a knife into somebody.
It started in Israel and the pandemic has spread to London and other European cities.
Myxlplik says
That link has been taken down.
Ant other sources?
berserker says
From the Daily Mail: dailym.ai/1KheoJa
Myxlplik says
Holy Cow, that psycho was grinning from ear to ear…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3400718/CCTV-shows-moment-woman-wearing-kangaroo-headscarf-attempted-stab-15-year-old-boy-London-bus.html
Bill says
http://www.thejournal.ie/kangaroo-print-stabbing-2550592-Jan2016/
simpleton1 says
That link did not work, try this one,,, where police are looking for the suspect.
The video is very short.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/moment-woman-tries-to-stab-teen-on-bus–123204
A burka or niqad could be used by either woman or men for a cleaner get away, and one would wonder how the police would portray that.?
gravenimage says
Kudos to this kid’s brave grandmother!
vlparker says
Oh, the irony is just too much. “The privatization of women’s sexuality?” From the culture of rape? Give me a break, Miss islamic supremacist creep.
Georg says
Excellent piece. You can smell the wafting fumes of a privatized woman who has received lots of ‘As’ on papers from terminally confused professors. Ever take a crap idea, dress it up and look at it sideways from Jupiter, write about it fancily and get an ‘A’? Mhm.
Michele Obama disgraced our societies when she headed to Britain only so she could visit Tower Hamlets and cheer on all the girls in hijabs saying something like, “Your story is my story.” She said it, not we(forever damning herself and betraying her hand). Of course the few girls interacting with her directly in front of the sea of head coverings were curiously sans hijab. Don’t have the courage of our convictions, do we? Utter sickness.
Mitch says
On the contrary, Islamic coverings hide and suppress a woman’s individuality, emphasizing her holy purpose to serve as a sexual object. The hijab announces immodestly: I am a field to be plowed by my owner.
Georg says
If you don’t think about it, Raqqa is more more progressive than New York.
mortimer says
The Islamic veil is part of women’s repression. It means women are never seen in public, cannot speak to non-family members, have few or no outside social contacts except for their immediate relatives, have no role to play outside the home.
Women have no role to play in Islamic society or Islamic public affairs, so their concerns, issues and agendas need never be addressed in an Islamic community. They are ‘dealt with’ by their husband, father, uncle or brother alone. The state has no word to say in the treatment of Islamic women. For women, the Islamic family unit is the state. That means there is no higher authority than a husband, father or uncle…even a son. A woman in danger of persecution has no higher authority to which she can appeal. This is what Mohammed wanted. A woman has only the human rights her husband, father, uncle, brother or son decide. No one may contradict her male ‘owner’ of the chattel. He has absolute power over a woman’s destiny, even to condemn her to death and carry it out.
Porky The Crusader says
Yep.
gravenimage says
Excellent post, Mortimer.
Georg says
This is what we far-righters are up against. Let it be seen.
Western Canadian says
I am not ‘far right’, and suggest that politically offensive terms NOT be applied to those of us who know enough about islam to loath it. That term is newspeak code for ‘nazi’, which is laughable and pathetic at the same time.
mortimer says
REALITY CHECK: Dalia Mogahed lives in the US and is protected by US law from enslavement or forcible confinement…not so in Pakistan, Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia.
Let Dalia Mogahed and tell us how free she is in a Sharia country.
Trevor Noah is a useful idiot with no analytical ability.
Daisy says
“The privatization of women’s sexuality” – how about The privatization of Muslim men’s sexuality? I would like Muslim men to stay at home so women who want to be in public can be free and safe from rape.
If God wanted to hide women’s beauty, why will he give it to us? Some perverted men can’t handle it – it is their problem, not ours.
Georg says
Yes
Cynthia says
Yeah… It’s really cool. It’s really cool if you like being a slave and a puppet. It’s really cool when you’re treated like a second class citizen. Yeah its really cool. It’s really cool to be a woman but not a human. Yeah its really cool to be a piece of property instead of a human. Yes it is really cool to be a thing instead of a person. Yes it’s really cool for someone to own you.
Claudia says
TERRORISM AND THE MUSLIM WORLDS’ CITIZENS AND POLITICS :
” The C.C.F.R legal system (the Citizen’s Contemporary Freedoms and Rights legal system) is the only way to democracy in the Muslim world…”
“Questions regarding the causes and effects of Self Radicalization/the calculated strategy to opte for, and to use Quranic resistance (the faithful use of Quranic laws and injonctions),that have been made by the leaders of some Muslim political opposition groups in the purpose to get territories and to, eventually, remove their Muslim adversaries, and “less Islamic” regimes/governments from political power… those questions are yet to be…”
“On the other hand, the sleeping, or rather silent or submissive secular-opposition communities of the Muslim world…”
“Reviving Christianity and Buddhism is a necessity…”
Automatic writing/Claudia Chentov – textes copy
PRCS says
So, here’s a little test–which of these would provide greater “privatization of her sexuality”?
Were a Muslim woman to wear a bikini in a public space, how, exactly, would a piece of fabric covering nothing but the hair on her head “privatize the sexuality”?
Or–
Wearing a loose fitting, high top, shoe length dress without hijab?
Would a filthy kuffar woman–wearing a similar dress and standing next to her on that stage–be flaunting her sexuality?
Hijab–despite the aura of superiority Muslim women think it demonstrates–does nothing more–to most westerners–than to identify Muslim women as the slaves of “Allah” and Muslim men
Just imagine how many Western men would spend time gawking at wig shop display fronts If their sexual interests were driven by nothing more than the hair on women’s heads.
Karen says
We are in big trouble if it takes a scarf to signal “privatization”. The law forbids rape, assault, harassment, etc. *regardless* of how a woman is dressed, or how she is perceived by others. And that is how it should be, end of story.
billybob says
In the West, even if a woman is naked and in bed next to a man, if he attempts sex with her in spite of her saying NO, it is rape. In Islam, it is a wife’s duty to submit to her husband whenever and however he wants it, regardless of her desires or lack thereof. – Except if she is “unclean”, a dehumanizing term the Quran uses for dogs too.
Asian Crusader says
Precisely. The whole rationale of forcing hijabs on muslimized women is to help Muslim men stake an EXCLUSIVE claim – our women are ours, and your women are also ours. This is why Muslim men – even young boys – are working so hard and with such unaccustomed diligence to force hijabs on “their” women.
Rape has been the driving force powering the spread of Islam for 1400 years.
Karen says
Then I fully expect Ms. Mogahed to refrain from promoting any activities such as high school “Covered Girl” days, or similar activities that invade the sexual privacy of non-Muslims.
Myxlplik says
This guys career is over, as is all others who shill for the Muslim Brotherhood.
If you want to see the direction the Brotherhood is going in America watch this video
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2uFlNRB4y-s
White hate is responsible for Islamophobia, which is Goliath, Muslims must for coalitions with Hispanics, and Blacks to defeat whitey… aka Islamophobia.
Myxlplik says
Simple answer;
Trump/Carson 🙂
Karen says
The constant messaging about the hijab by people like Ms. Mogahed is to promote the false idea that there is a cultural war going on against it. I’m sure there are people who make eye contact with women in hijabs, and stare, or roll their eyes, or even look away in disgust. Many are just curious. The vast majority, myself included, are inwardly distressed by the hijab, because of all it stands for against women, but refuse to react. A few have committed more serious acts, but the hijab is essentially a non-issue. Most people in the U.S see it as an adult woman’s decision, albeit one against their best interests.
But Ms. Mogahed isn’t interested in mere tolerance; she is cultivating the victim’s sympathy, to help change perceptions from tolerance to active approval. It is no one’s obligation to think positive thoughts about the hijab or Islam, or anything else. This is yet another attempt to work evil, dreadful Sharia into the consciousness of non-Muslims.
Another powerful article by Robert Spencer that should be read by everyone.
PRCS says
“Most people in the U.S see it as an adult woman’s decision”
I think that, too, especially when I see hijabed, prepubescent girls.
Karen says
I know, poor girls…
gravenimage says
Here’s a revered Imam on the subject:
“A girl should start hijab from the age of seven. By the age of ten, it becomes an obligation on us to force her to wear Hijab, and if she doesn’t wear Hijab, we hit her”
–Mohammad Al-Jibaly
Are these little seven-year-olds “privatizing their sexuality”?
After all, the “Prophet” of Islam was a notorious pedophile.
Karen says
And people like Mogahed would deceive Westerners into thinking the hijab is a voluntary choice made by a devote woman. I get especially agitated when Islamists try to implant phony perceptions of the hijab’s purpose through the insidious ‘Covered Girl’ campaigns they attempt to run in high schools. These offer a hijab to non-Muslim girls to wear, supposedly as a show of support.
PJ says
These women raised in Islam cannot conceive of a society in which men are taught that it is wrong to sexually objectify women. So they cover themselves with a little fabric and think they are safe from abuse and predators while simultaneously training men to be juvenile delinquents for the glory of Allah. Ridiculous.
Wellington says
The hijab is demonstrative in sartorial form of a much larger problem and that is the forced virtue aspect found in Islam. Forced virtue is sham virtue. Only when someone is free to not abide by many of the standards of a given society without fear of physical harm can true virtue exist. Those who defend Islam never get this.
Karen says
One of the many ironies of life, and you’ve expressed it so beautifully.
Frank Day says
Spot on.
Angemon says
Superb piece.
nacazo says
“privatization of sexuality” a phrase that should be laughed off into dust.
Rob says
But supposing the woman wanted to share her private sexuality with a loving partner – after all it’s her private property – she would be murdered.
If it is her privacy then it has nothing whatever to do with father, brothers, cousins, uncles and other villagers.
PRCS says
…SHOULD have nothing whatsoever….
gravenimage says
Very true, Rob.
GordyL says
You know, if I were taking my wife and daughter to an Islamic country I’d want them in a full beekeepers Burka for rape prevention!
The Awful Truth says
Thanks for this. When my non Muslim mother was at university, all her Muslim friends had public sector sexualities – but the Arab Bedouins privatised it all thanks to their wealth and supine Western pals. On a lighter note, the Hijab is not Muslim – no it was worn by the Jews before though I don’t think they covered their faces like the purdah wives of sheiks – let all Christians misunderstand Muslim women who celebrate the sanctity of Virgin Mary. Complement these hijab wearers that it reminds you of the holy mother. The Virgin Mary precedes Aisha by at least 600 years and we must be grateful that Muslims owe so much to the Holy mother as well as Byzantine architecture. Now they have a Big Ben in Mecca. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery – go on be flattered for a change.
gravenimage says
“The privatization of women’s sexuality.” A well-constructed and extraordinarily clever phrase, to be sure.
………………………………
It *is* clever: it is also an utter falsehood.
There is *nothing* private about women’s sexuality in Islam–it belongs to her father, to her husband, to her owner if she is a sex slave–or to any roving groups of men on the street if she dares to venture out *without* the slave rag.
And then is she is judged to have been insufficiently “private” with her sexuality, she can be murdered with impunity by her family, her “community”, or any howling mob of Muslims with stones in their hands.
God, I hate Islam–and the pious Muslimahs who enforce its savage diktats just as do the men.
E Ward says
Mogahed is a professional Muslim. The hijab to her represents dollars. This is not true for many Muslim women. For many, it means oppression. So lady, shut up already.
spartan says
No doubt many many feminists will take encouragement from Dalia’s words. Naomi Wolf, high priestess of third-wave feminism, has identified exposure of women’s bodies as a function of patriarchal control and hegemony, and declared the burka to be “sexy”. It does after all free women from intrusive inspection, and hence aesthetic oppression, by males.
The majority of converts to Islam in Britain are women: perhaps we are witnessing here a fouth-wave of feminism where Western women will escape enslavement to Western patriarchy by embracing the burka and Islam…
Frank Day says
Not forgetting the Saudi school girls who were forced to die in a fire because they were’t allowed to escape without their bin-bags on.
Mark says
Please view share and give a thumbs up to the following documentary, https://youtu.be/t_Qpy0mXg8Y. It is very revealing about how treacherous Islam is.
billybob says
“As Muslim women, we actually ask you not to wear the hijab in the name of interfaith solidarity”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/12/21/as-muslim-women-we-actually-ask-you-not-to-wear-the-hijab-in-the-name-of-interfaith-solidarity/
Carolyne says
I fail to understand the hair as a sexual organ. Men and women have identical hair, it’s just a matter of what length one chooses to wear it. Do Muslim men equate all objects, animate and inanimate with sex? I know their sexual attraction to goats and camels, but do they also desire say, a palm tree or a bunch of bananas?. Are their entire lives bound up in seeing the world and all its contents as prospective sexual partners? But then one supposes that marrying one’s first cousin for 100 generations might skew one’s intelligence enough to cause that. That must be it.