Zael

This article, while in some ways hard to decipher, does make some good points. The reason for this is because the article is written from a point of reason.  The beginning talks about belly dancers and harem girls in advertisements, especially for tobacco. This is a good example of consumers views on arab womanhood, where it is seen as exotic and sexualized instead of covered and hidden. The article then talks about orientalist imagery in the united states. It has “encouraged the breakdown of traditional borders.” 

The afghan girl is a very interesting part of this article, talking about the documentary. September 11^th was a huge factor in the interest. She was a representation of what was going on at the time, and the amount of prejudice that there was against the arabs around 9/11 and for years afterwards.

When mythology comes into play, the Afghan girl comes into place too. Her eyes are interesting  because of how piercing they are, and this is personalizing. It is not necessarily enticing, but people see the eyes as a window to the soul, and even if they dont actually see the emotions that they think they see in them, it does show what kind of emotions they think that she would be having. This is a reinforcement of a stereotype, because it encourages people to fill in the blanks, which is something that usually reveals prejudice.

I thought that the most interesting thing in the article was the Reebok ad. You can barely tell that it is a robe, it is pretty much just black with eyes. The way that she blends into the backround makes her intimidating, but because she is so reserved and covering so much of her body, she seems secretive and is therefore enticing. Humans are fascinated by difference and secrets, and that makes this ad that much more enticing. You are wondering what she looks like behind that veil, and that makes you think more about the ad, which makes you think more about the shoes. It is however, provocative to use something as private as a fully hidden and obviously arab person to sell sneakers.

The fact that girls were expelled for wearing veils over their hair is absolutely ridiculous. My favorite part of this article was the discussion of how meaning is not inherent in objects, but is socially constructed around them instead. A veil means nothing, but because of meaning that is placed on it, it does mean something. Objects are interesting that way, because they literally mean nothing until meaning is placed upon them. Because the veil is so present in a culture that is so oppressed and so stereotyped, the veil is therefore oppressed and stereotyped, hence why there would be such a strong reaction to the girls wearing them. Also, France is generally a xenophobic culture, with only 7 percent of the French population being made up of immigrants.

One of the main things that needs to be brought up here is the sense of culture that goes along with a veil or any means of covering yourself up. If it is a cultural norm, then it makes sense that everybody would do it, but that does not necessarily mean that it has religious meaning. Some may wear it because it had religious meaning to them, but others may wear it because everybody else wears it, and that is when it loses its meaning entirely.