Yep, you’re right: all of them. The women named in the December 8 piece include a hijabi fashion blogger, a journalist who appeared (clothed) in Playboy, a fencer, a hip-hop group, and the Miss Minnesota contestant who wore both a hijab and a burkini. It’s not so much the achievements of Muslim women that are celebrated here—and there’s nothing wrong with that—but the headscarf. Hijabs are mentioned repeatedly: here are two excerpts.
From the introduction:
Muslim Americans continue to face rising intolerance and Islamophobia as a result, in part, of aggressive attacks on their community by politicians and conservative media. They were assaulted, ridiculed and at times even murdered for their religious identification ― and hijab-wearing Muslim women often bore the brunt of this bigotry.
Check the link to the “even murdered for their religious identification” link in the Guardian, which says this about the murder of two men wearing Muslim garb:
The motive for the shooting was not immediately known and no evidence has been uncovered so far that the two men were targeted because of their faith.
“There’s nothing in the preliminary investigation to indicate that they were targeted because of their faith,” said deputy inspector Henry Sautner of the New York police department.
That’s the exact opposite of what the HuffPo article claims about the link. And then there’s this:
Well-known Muslim beauty blogger Nura Afia made history in November by becoming CoverGirl’s first ambassador who wears a hijab. With her CoverGirl contract, Afia will appear in commercials as well as a giant billboard in New York’s Times Square alongside celebrity representatives like Sofia Vergara and Katy Perry.
“I feel proud to be part of a movement that is showing the hijab in a positive light for once. The more of us who can wear them as representatives of these big household names on TV or billboards the better,” Afia told The New York Times.
Now that’s making America great!
What is really the positive light here is not the woman herself who is achieving, but that the achiever wears a hijab. And can this garment, reflecting a religious dictate that women must hide themselves to avoid arousing the uncontrollable lusts of men, really be seen in a positive light? It’s a symbol not only of a largely oppressive faith (one based, like all faiths, on fiction), but of the misogyny of that faith itself. Do we need to show the yarmulke in a positive light given the higher per capita rate of anti-Semitic than anti-Islamic acts?
Read for yourself (screenshot links to the article):