Who Decides What's Socially Acceptable?

Let’s gain a clear perspective here, so in the 50-60's and prior most women covered top to bottom including their hair, regardless of nationality, then came along the mass media streams like newspapers, TV and radio. Now we have in the mix a lot of other social platforms.

The mini skirt then was introduced and endorsed around that time by the mainstream media of course, fine, no issues. A new culture was created for women, and now all over the world women can choose what they like to wear and have their own idea of their dress code. Nowadays we also have in the mix social media influencers and musicians who also endorse a certain look, we've all heard the term 'sex sells' and a lot of young impressionable minds will follow this even though they're not a musician or influencer themselves.

Now women who wear hijab (a scarf that covers THEIR hair), personally, as growing up with one side of the family who have always covered their hair I saw it as their culture as growing older I realised this was also to do with their religion. Let’s take religion out of it for a minute, they see their scarfs when they are in public just like you see your clothing, you wouldn't walk out in the public in your underwear right? No. At MINIMUM it would be a crop top and shorts. Most would agree you would not walk freely around in your underwear in public, no, this is what you wear privately. So, the scarf for them is just as essential as your top that covers our chest, whether it's out of tradition, culture, religion or straight out liberation.

For the Europeans who may not understand to see a perspective not implying this is what you should do but covering the hair is just as important as covering your chest area and private parts for them.

Back to the mass/mainstream media, usually these days you get a feel that they have a secret agenda, always have bias opinions on articles, pushing their own opinion without the other side of the story, constantly telling us, as the public consumer, who they choose to be popular and what they think is popular according to what they deem is 'hot right now'.

Having said that we all have a right to free speech and a right to practice our religion, so why has one of the leaders in the western world banned hijab in higher education?

Forcing young ladies to lose out on education, well let’s be honest, are some ladies who from previous generations have been super oppressed themselves, not only in society but at home, due to misinformation, corruption and lack of guidance.

We think women had got their rights BACK just a generation ago, but now it looks like there are double standards, are Belgium fearful by empowering the vulnerable?

In some countries may have migrated from for their own reasons, could be for work, a better life, being encouraged or unfortunately having to leave their war-torn countries, to be safe are now being oppressed for being themselves.

Belgium, has now in turn, created a standard and a bad example for the rest of the countries, what will happen now? Haven't Muslim women or any woman suffered enough? Yes. Whichever way you want to spin this one, it is, a clear violation to the women and girls of any nationalities and their rights.

They are now indirectly being alienated from society if they do not comply, for something that does not harm others and rather protects the individual. These girls have had their choice taken away from them, to practice what they think is morally right, or prefer not to have conformed to what mass media has endorsed over the years. And now some will lose out on their human right to education.

Practically, there has been no bar in society on how much you show freely but there is a line on how much you can cover. Double standards.

The fact the Prime Minister of Belgium is a woman herself makes me sick, knowing after how the generations before fought so hard to give us our rights and indirectly she has taken one away.

This has been a major loss for the women rights movement around the world which is still ongoing especially for those who have already been suppressed and some initially came to these countries to add to their economy or for safety but have now been violated or taken advantage of.

A pro of mass media endorsement and making things socially acceptable is pride, LGBT community, that's one good thing, and a good example on how it's helped on a mass scale, I am sure the LGBT community is glad, because they themselves have had to deal with abuse from those who may have treated them inhumanely, a wonderful way to validate and accept these individuals.

Back to mass media, being the ones who 'decide' what is socially acceptable, why can't they accept or even create some leverage for the women who CHOOSE to cover up head to toe.

Is this indirectly ethnic cleansing and invalidating? As we have heard reports from China pro brainwashing and re-programming Muslims to disregard their religion for their own benefit of control and exploitation. Is there a wider agenda here? Where is the spotlight on this?

I have to reiterate that it is a major loss for all women, as one the great women that has lived Fatima Al-fihri who built the first ever university for women who herself covered head to toe.

From then to us gaining back our rights, I still have no clarity on what happened in between. But in today’s society only a certain type of woman is socially accepted.

Coming away from this topic, in general if you believe in something that the mainstream media has forced to be socially acceptable, having an opposing opinion could mean that they will totally disregard you, not only that, major corporations who have this 'peer' pressure from their close knit media networks will alienate anyone who does otherwise, thus forcing you to 'adapt' to not what they think is right personally, perhaps for 'image' or solely to gain money from one group or source.

Talking about British, European, we went from being fully covered to skirts, to shorts and crop tops. It was only a short time ago that if you wore something that was past your calf's you were 'seen' as a prostitute to put bluntly. Not that I agree with this statement today because, I've been brought up to dress how I like, which is liberation in itself, just like I'd like the option to still dress how I like, whether that's head to toe or not.

If you have the right to not cover, why don't we have the social acceptance to cover. Not only is this major Islamophobia, a lady who chooses to cover her hair has not socially been accepted through mainstream media. It is a bad moment in our history in Belgium for banning hijabs in school. The world where every girl/woman should be able to choose.

While writing this article, I came across a online newspaper who have reported an update on Shamima Begum, (I can agree with most of the public, not our most favourite person in the world right now!) but they chose to put up a picture without her headscarf and they've outright violated her publicly as she is Muslim.

That is like putting up a photo of a non-Muslim photo in their underwear without their consent. We would not have this. So why the other? After seeing a lot of oppression constantly to Muslims across the world and no moral support from mass media has given me a disheartening feeling towards people in power, who have allowed this to carry on for so long in whatever country it may be going on in.

I believe I have answered the original question for you.

Lastly, Jimmy Saville, who was knighted in his career was blasted across media even though his peers knew what he was getting up to at BBC and I am sure others who joined him who have not been named. So it makes you think has the mainstream media really had our best interests at heart or moving forwards, blindly that you should just 'adapt' and 'go' with what they push or who they choose to endorse based on their own agenda's.

Updated and corrected: 17/03/2022