Idrees Ahmad responds re my post on The National's coverage of the Syrian fundamentalist movement:
I don't quite understand why a Gulf newspaper criticizing Syria surprises you? Gulf states have long been hostile towards Syria, and this newspaper, frankly a rather poor one... is hardly in a place to to speak about the horrors of 'state secret service'. I used to live in Dubai, and it is not a pretty place for anyone holding dissenting views. But I found this horror at the wearing of Hijab [!] rather amusing.
Have ever seen how the so called 'locals' dress in UAE? Sure, the expats can wear next to nothing, and they have a plentiful supply of Russian belly dancers, but to equate women wearing hijab with oppression is frankly patronizing, and smacks of colonial feminism.
True oppression in the Middle East has nothing whatever to do with hijab. In the gulf most of the oppressed are not Arabs, or even muslims. they are mostly Philipinas or East European/former Soveits. There is a high degree of sexual exploitation and also fraud of various nature. And then again, there is a constituency even more oppressed than the women: children. Until recently they were being smuggled from Baluchistan and other places in South Asia for use as camel jockeys. The royals themselves were involved in this. Even at present there is a court case pending in the US for child slavery against one of the royals.
P.S. You must check out my friend Robin Yassin-Kassab's first novel, The Road From Damascus. Robin is an Oxford educated British-Syrian (mom Brit, dad Syrian). Here are his views on hijab.
Of course, if we call it a stirntikhl, wearing it is an admirable maintenance of Jewish tradition. See The Oppression of Orthodox Jewish Women.