A two year old girl, Bhia Hadid, has been killed. The police have arrested and charged her aunt for the murder. Which of these things is more noteworthy?
The Southtown Star and various other newspapers across Chicago and the U.S carried articles about the case which posits that the latter is more important: the accused, Nour Hadid, happens to be a Muslim, and she also happens to wear the hijab. During her arrest and subsequent mugshot, Hadid was forced to remove her hijab: the mugshot shows an obviously distressed woman attempting to cover herself with her arms and crying. We will not publish the mugshot here, but you can see the image in almost every news story regarding this case, including the link above.
The Star’s article focuses on Hadid’s mugshot and the outrage it has created in her family because of the face that she is without her hijab. I guess Bhia’s death is not as important as the fact that the suspect was photographed without her head covering, wearing only a skimpy top. Not only are those obsessed with brandishing Muslims as some strange race of people having a field day with this story, but those who are tired of Muslims and their rhetoric are also getting in on the fun: “So, I guess the latest thing is for law enforcement to bend over backwards for the Muslims and grant them preferential treatment.” writes one such journalist in the Hinterland Gazette.
Why any media agency would give precious time and space for a story like this, rather than focusing on the death of a child, is reflective of the general attitude towards Muslims, painted as an alien cult, with no value for life, obsessed with covering their women. Sadly, Hadid’s husband does much to further these notions. In all of his statements, Hadid’s husband forgets to mention his dead niece, or why his wife is in prison in the first place. Using the hijab to sideline the real issue of child abuse and murder is very convenient, and once again hijab seems to be the be-all end-all issue when it comes to anything that has to do with Muslim women, regardless of their achievements, or crimes.
The Star’s article features a juxtaposition of pictures: one shows a clearly distraught Hadid, wearing a white tank top, whilst the second shows a woman wearing a niqab. The pictures seem to suggest that Hadid would have normally dressed in niqab, as opposed to how she was photographed. The picture is captioned, “By custom, some practicing women wear a hijab”, as if the veiled women represents the only possible interpretation of wearing the hijab. This could be very very far from the truth, especially given that at the end of the article, it clearly states that Hadid was in the possession of a headscarf–not a niqab–which was confiscated due to suicide threats. No details are given as to why Hadid appeared in a tank top, whether she asked for her headscarf, or whether she was even in a coherent state of mind in the first place. All the quotes come from her husband, once again feeding stereotypes of the “honour” of Muslim men revolving around the covering of their women and furthering the idea and practice that Muslim women can’t or shouldn’t speak for themselves.
The story smacks of sensationalism. A quick Google search reveals that most media agencies have decided to cover the mugshot, rather than the murder. Muslim women and their dressing habits once again dominate the news agenda. My take on the Star’s article is that the veiled woman is used to draw on notions of exotic and erotic Muslim women, and the picture of Hadid is used to satiate the appetites of those who want to know how Muslim women look without it. Rather similar to before and after makeover shots.
The message pouring out of the media is that Muslims have a very skewed sense of priorities, and live in a world where women’s headscarves are more important than murdered children. This could not be further from the truth. If any of the media who carried this story has bothered to research Islam’s stance on murder, they would have noted that justice takes priority over individual rights. But one man’s outcry at his wife’s mugshot once again leads me to ask, is the hijab the only stance on Muslim women we are going to see, over and over? Yes, the suspect deserved the right to be photographed whilst properly attired, and I commend her husband for taking up her cause, and defending her rights. However, the main issue here is not the religion of the alleged murderer, but her crime. Whatever religion one follows, murder is a heinous sin, and more so given that the victim was a child. If Hadid is found guilty, she will have more pressing concerns than her right to modest attire.
Arabisto carried the story as well, with a catchy headline, “East and West clash even in the backdrop of murdered child.” Just what do East and West have to with it? Are all hijab-wearing women from the East? That said, the writer, Ray Hanania, covered the story from a more balanced angle, with some excellent analysis.
Is it really racism? Should the debate be focused on whether or not the accused woman was in fact the victim of discrimination, which the Orland Park Police denied claiming they followed the same procedure for Nour Hadid as they do for all suspects?
You cannot permit anyone accused of a crime to hide behind their religious observance. The real tragedy is that the crime, whether Nour Hadid is innocent or guilty, imposes on us a vigilance that must place the need to determine the truth as our cumulative priority.
The old nun-hijabi spin does not escape this story. “Would a nun be treated the same way?” asked one Muslim activist, according to the Star. Muslims need to stop looking for ways to explain their behavior through comparisons with other religions. A nun represents the Church in an official capacity, whilst a women in hijab is not the official symbol of Islam, as some would like to suggest, and is even less so if she is accused of murder.
In no way do I wish to belittle a woman’s right to covering in such circumstances, as a hijab-wearing woman myself I do think Hadid was compromised, but I believe that until her innocence or guilt is proved, her right to hijab should be a non-issue. The media might think that her semi-naked mugshot is a breaking news item, but I think that the fact she is accused of killing her baby niece is much much more pressing. The real insult to the religion of Islam, is the killing of a two year old, not the photograph of a suspected murderer sans hijab.
Tweet
Tags: hijab, murder, Nour Hadid
[...] Saffiyah at Muslimah Media Watch explores the media coverage of the alleged slaying of a two-year-old child by a Muslimah who insisted that she be allowed to wear her hijab in her police mugshot. The request was denied and the distraught woman’s picture was released to the public. Much more coverage focused on the hijab than on the death of the child – a situation that was not helped by the many comments made by the woman’s husband defending her right to cover but failing to mention the death of the child. As Saffiyah concludes, “The real insult to the religion of Islam is the killing of a two year old, not the photograph of a suspected murderer sans hijab.” [...]
Salaam Alaikum,
A brilliant analysis, masha Allah. Such reporting and soundbiting makes it seem like Muslims care about covering more then children.
While we’re on the subject of death, I’d really like to see the “Muslims Care About Honour aka Female Modesty More then Anything Else, Ever” meme, meet a swift demise.
Safiyyah, details were given as why Hadid appeared in a tank top, and Fatemah even posted it on the Friday Links. It’s on Ray Hanania’s 2nd link.
Here are the details:
“As far as the rest of the clothing, it is what the person had on at the time. No more. No less. And that is what is in the picture. The press requested the picture,” McCarthy explained. Controversy surfaced over whether or not the police humiliated Nour Hadid by forcing her to remove her Hijab. But the Hijab that Nour Hadid wore was not a typical Hijab that simply covered her head. The Hijab she wore was an extended Hijab that covered the upper torso of her body. With the Hijab removed, she would appear as if she had also been stripped of her clothing, a view confirmed by Amani Ghouleh, who is the publisher of the Arab Horizon (al-Offok al-Arabi) Newspaper and who has closely monitored the situation. She added, “Her Hijab when the police came, was a long Hijab that covered her head and shoulders. It is more than just a Hijab it is outer wear,”
You may not consider a tank top proper attire but this was what she had on at the time. Personally, I would have given her my own t-shirt off my back.
I also disagree with you, how can I commend her husband for reinforcing stereotypes of Muslims? He could have focussed on the sad death of the child or how they believed the pathology report was incorrect or how they believed she was positioned into a false confession, actually the lawyer focused on those points. The husband was all about HIJBA HIJAB hahhh, our Muslim rights you, “It [being shown without your hijab] is against our religion; we do not do this in our culture.” Orland police “really going to be in big trouble”.
You mention you thought Hadid was compromised, do you mind further explaining it?
@ laila: the issue with the hejab is that it doesn’t seem like it was necessary to have her remove it; if that’s how she appears on her driver’s license, then her mugshot would be better for identification if it mirrored that pic. If nothing else, it might not have troubled the PD to just hand her a towel or something to cover herself. I’m just putting that out there; her hejab isn’t the issue.
My real issue is with media stories’ focus on this hejab deal rather than the fact that she allegedly killed her niece. Like Safiyyah says, I think that’s the much bigger story, and it seems ridiculous for media outlets to focus on cloth rather than child abuse/murder.
@ laila: yes I agree with you, her husband should have focused on the tragedy of an innocent death, when I say commend, I mean that if indeed Hadid is traumatized by being photographed without her hijab, as a husband he has the right to take it up (again, if indeed she is the one who was outraged), but by NO means should it overshadow the murder!
At the time of writing this piece, the details mentioned in Ray Hananias article were not out as yet, thanks for pointing that out.
As for Nour being compromised, this is just my opinion based on my own hijab experiences, if I had to be photographed in that way… that does not mean this story deserves so much coverage, I firmly maintain that the murder of a child is the issue here.
Interesting…so instead of focusing on the murder they decide to focus on the hijab? And why do I sense that maybe they’re focusing on the hijab because they can’t escape the sense of glee they feel over reporting on a Muslim allegedly committing a heinous crime as opposed to what they regularly report on. May the little girl find happiness and tranquility finally in Jannat.
It’s important that the Arab and Muslim Community get involved like this in this and similar public debates. (Although I am Christian, everyone in this country thinks I am Muslim so in a way, IU am a Muslim — at least a Muslim by culture, so the issue touches on my life directly, too).
The issue here is that the woman was processed throught he system in the same way everyone is processed. The Hijab became an issue because she wears a “Robin Hood” Hijab, or one that not only covers her head but her body also so when the Hijab was removed, the entire body cover was removed.
On the otherhand, a baby died and it seems so tragic that a Muslim life was extinguished and all anyone can care about is the Hijab.
Some Muslim women wear a Hijab and some don’t. That’s their choice based on their belief and I respect it — I don’t share the same view for a Berqa, though, and believe the bewrqa is a male form of oppression — even though many Muslim women wear a Berqa willingly. Male cultural oppression is how I look at that.
But, we don’t all have to agree on every issue in order to come together for larger issues of principle and morality and fairness.
Anyway, I am glad I could help with some information reaching out to all sides.
Thanks so much
Ray Hanania
http://www.RadioChicagoland.com
Murder aside, the most important issue here seems to be–why would you continue to proliferate a photo that is CLEARLY distressing to the woman in it and her family? There’s a reason they didn’t play the tapes of Steve Irwin’s death on the nightly news; that’s just bad taste. Granted, “death” and “non-hijab” are two totally different things, but don’t the people involved have some say in where their photo ends up?
I’m guessing that most of the lay audience isn’t getting the “secular Christians lack empathy!” message, but really, spreading around the mugshot story just makes everyone involved look bad.
yes definitely, which is why we did not publish the picture here. However, as a media watch website, we respond to anything that involves Muslim women in the media. I fully agree with you, the picture is what caused the big stir in the first place, and should have never have been released, but since it has, that doesn’t mean the media should have made such a huge story out of it!