You and I already discussed this, ages ago, and I like the concept - impementing it, of course, is another story. But hey, I'm betting you already have a camera on hand at all times - your cell phone.

sub blog with a feed on the front page showing a random photo.

You might like www.Muslim-A-Day.com. It is a response to the problem you observe, that there aren't enough images of normal muslim people in the news. It doesn't have an attractive woman focus exactly, but plenty of them have been featured. Submissions welcome.

Dude, you are completely right. At York U there are tons of fashionable Muslim chiquitas wearing great fabrics and patterns. I don't know if other universities are like this, but York is totally the religious pride school. It's also a fashion runway, and the muhajabats* are not insensitive to the environment either, and the two factors make for a great mix. I think it's great, because even though Hindus have a great fashion heritage, it's pretty much dropped here in North America, except for the occasional scarf draped over one's shoulder, and forget about the men... Muslim women break through the homogeneous environment. Well, so do some more pious(?) Muslim men, but they are rarely stylish...

*: had to look it up!

Dear e,

We might turn it into a general "counter-mainstream picture" section. There could be your "Muslims aren't all drab" pics, but also "funky stuff we encounter in the region" pics.

--MSK*

Gulf Arab women (Oman excepted) are still pretty much required to wear black, especially in government workplaces, but it is becoming a lot more colourful and ornate.

And in terms of "official" photos, like the stock photos you mention - whether corporate shots on websites, or advertising, or press launches - then plain black and shapeless is pretty much all you'll get, usually with every strand of hair covered. (And the model is most probably actually Lebanese not Gulfie, but that's by the by).

So you can't really blame the West for having the impression that it's one big black marquee here. Those ghastly "veil" novels don't help perceptions much either.

I dont buy it. There are publications out there, that if the Western media was really interested in finding out what was going on, they could.

One that comes to mind is the Saudi women's publication "Sayyidati". The women in the publication wear anything from niqab to no head covering at all.

It is a popular magazine amoungst the women in the Gulf and Saudi. Popular enough that Saudi students going abroad are offered a free subscription to it.

If they took at look at their website, or picked up a copy of the magazine that is available even here in the USA at any store that caters to Arabs they'd know better.

Take a look at the link below. I think many people who think Saudi/Gulf/Middle East is nothing but "bag wearing" women need to catch up a bit.

It is full of fashion, columns of advice for women, stuff from Hollywood, the Middle East. Think Vogue mixed with People magazine and that is pretty much what it is like.

My favourite part is the back couple of pages where readers submit pictures of their children and the magazine prints them.

http://www.sayidaty.net/

No offence, but I have been in the Gulf in the media for six years and I have never heard of that magazine (interesting and progressive though it does sound).

So if it hasn't crossed my path, how on earth are Western-based media supposed to become aware of it?

No offence, but I have been in the Gulf in the media for six years and I have never heard of that magazine (interesting and progressive though it does sound).

So if it hasn't crossed my path, how on earth are Western-based media supposed to become aware of it?

This one is quite funny:

An afternoon with the veiled

I grew up with Sayidatty, granted it has gone off the boil a bit and is now considered a bit naff. To be fair though, it is aimed squarely at the painty toenail housewife and I can see how it has remained under Western media radar...

SD,

Not sure if Sayidaatii is big in the Gulf, but it's a staple in Egypt & the Levant.

--MSK*

Frankly Sinan, you're being your typical navel-gazing whinger.

There is no reason for your average Western journalist who's just been assigned to a story - with no background in the region - to know of obscure magazines nor have the background to dig up the info.

In the real world most journos get sent on a short term assignment and don't have the time or language skills to get deep quickly.

So the often superficial and at least the easy to access becomes dominant. That you consider Sayyadat an obvious reference point merely says that you don't recall or understand the dynamics of getting to know a new region. Established journos may know it - may - but it's rather special. Accessibility and ease for the non-initiated was Eerie's point.

Alright I'm not muslim (was raised without religion in fact) but I don't quite get the fashion plus veiling bit. Isn't the point of veiling to conceal "charms"? So then why is it consistent to add "charms" with decoration, embrodiery, bright colors, fashion generally, when the point is to conceal "charms"? Why is it religious to go about with a bright decorated scarf over your hair, when the being looked at by strange men is discouraged? Wouldn't a plain black scarf be more religious?

In the Christian world, no nun wears colorful decorated habits. It seems to me the point of religious dress is to give up the bright sexy world, that's the spiritual path. I thought that was why the Saudi veil looks rather like the habit.

Where I teach in America, I see Muslim girls all in black with fancy sexy pumps and lacy stockings. Huh? Sorry, I just don't get it.

Personal interpretation mate, personal interpretation. The decorative bits I may add are not particularly controversial among most folks - excepting the Saudi style ascetics - Islam is not an ascetic religion so direct comparison to nun's is off base. It's supposed to be about covering up one's sexy parts to help reduce improper desire (i.e. outside the marriage, etc). Desire itself is not improper.

Loundsbury,

If you think Sayyidaty is an "obscure magazine" you certainly have no experience in the Gulf or the wider Middle East.

As MSK has noted, it is a staple in Egypt and the Levant, and is the same in the The Gulf.

It would be like trying to cover American media and not being aware of Cosmo, it just wouldnt happen.

And I still wonder why you call me "Sinan"? If you know Arabic and the culture you will most certainly be aware that "Abu Sinan" does not mean I am Sinan, rather the father of Sinan. Has that escaped you as well?

I may be navel-gazing, and you call this typical for me, but you are being a right twat, as typical for you. I come here to make an observation and you have to get the hump with me?

Some personal skills on your part are in order. You seem to be in the habit of personally attacking everyone who disagrees with you. I have seen that from you on numerous threads, even on different blogs.

If you act like this in person it is a wonder you havent been knocked out on many occasions. Or maybe you watch your mouth and manners a bit more when you are within arms reach of somebody?

Grow up!

Dissent, I think I know what you’re saying, though as Lounsbury pointed out, the nun comparison isn’t quite right. Rather, I liken it to the dressing habits of some of the younger, unmarried women at the fundamentalist church my sister attends-they always wear dresses or skirts, always modest length, long sleeves, etc. But then they’re always wearing spike heels of ungodly (and unsafe) height to church, with those tiny bits of lacy stockings showing through. Runs completely counter to what it seems they’re trying to block or avoid with the rest of their outfit, at least in my opinion, but they show no signs of quitting it anytime soon.

The same goes for fancy headscarves and other get-ups on Muslim females in public. Sure, it looks cute, and the intent is obviously to attract attention, male admiration, etc. Why bother with covering up your hair in the first place if you’re out trying to attract male attention though? I can easily stick a lot closer to the concept of hijab and be a whole lot more nondescript without even covering my hair by going out in an overcoat and sunglasses, tying my hair back, clear lip balm instead of makeup, etc., than other Muslim females I see in fancy headscarves and layered (but skintight) clothing. Sorry to disappoint the original poster, but what you’re applauding pretty much runs counter to the concept of hijab, cute as it may be. Hijab isn’t a pre-established costume, and it’s not relegated to hideous ninja suits, and there’s certainly a whole lot more to it than just tying on a headscarf. Its purpose doesn’t run parallel to that of fashion’s. No need to call it the Muslim Sartorialist really, since scarves worn to attract attention or worn with other clothing designed to attract attention cease to really have anything to do with the wearer’s religious beliefs. In these cases, the wearer being Muslim is incidental.

First, I would suggest you look through the photos. What I'm talking about has nothing to do with Muslim women wearing stilettos with scarves, or wearing see-through hijabs, or skintight clothing, etc.

Regardless of what a woman wears, she is going to attract male attention - be it cleavage or a tendril of hair peeking out from under a tight scarf. Let's not pretend that a drab grey hijab is somehow going to make a man forget that there is a woman under there.

A fashionably modest Muslim woman isn't exploiting some kind of Islamic loophole by wearing a hijab that coordinates perfectly with her Coach handbag.

Even if you think it's wrong, lots of Muslim women dress this way and are never noticed by Western media. This leads to a skewed perception of how diverse Muslim women really are in both choice of clothing and personal belief. That is the point I'm trying to make.

The eternal question -- is the woman in question and in some particular occasion dressing to impress men or women? (Not a "bi-" allusion, simply a social reality of purposes for decorative clotheswear).

I think women largely dress to impress other women. Men usually don't notice all the little details unless they're metrosexual.

What concerns me is equating female Muslim modesty with a) invisibility or b) ugliness. I think that is a gross generalization based on overexposure to Wahhabi-style Islam.

Sinan

You are far dimmer than I have always suspected.

Sayyadat is an obscure mag. Who knows it except, well, MENA women interested in Arabic language womens rubbish? Not any more than a specialist niche magazine in another area, despite your twitish knee-jerking.

A foreign reporter going to the US without a background in womens mags would indeed likely overlook Cosmo, an obscure publication itself if you are not in that particular sphere. Wouldn't happen? Bollocks, such things happen all the bloody fucking time. Above all in cases of reporters being generalists (the majority) in both topic and global coverage.

You, in short, make my point on your idiotic navel gazing, never mind your continuously tedious fetishisation of your Saudi connexions - take a hint mate, they're not the center of the ever-loving motherfucking world.

As for me calling you Sinan, well, I feel like idiot boy. Too lazy to type it full out. Don't like it, fuck off, I care not for your precious little thin skinned new convertitus rubbish myself, qaouid.

Or you can get some bloody perspective, although it seems bloody unlikely.

Eerrie has a point. It is important to note that Saudi women get VERY dressed up for occasions in which there will be no interaction with men at all.

Case in point is the Saudi wedding where men and women are seperate, sometimes in the same house with different men's and women's quarters, sometimes the celebration will be held at different locations for male and female.

At these events were there is no mingling of the sexes it is well know that the women in attendence will spend a lot of time and money purchasing and wearing their very best outfits all for the benefit of the solely female party goers.

The female party goer wears whatever-type of abbaya to the wedding, head/shoulder type, and when they are inside outside of public view, the abbaya comes off and the very expensive dresses, hand bags and the like come out.

Of course I have never been to a female section of such a party, but my wife assures me that the clothing is very high end, the ladies spend a lot of time getting their hair and nails done and the outfits tend not to be too modest.

What concerns me is equating female Muslim modesty with a) invisibility or b) ugliness. I think that is a gross generalization based on overexposure to Wahhabi-style Islam.

I'll disagree. It's certainly a subjective matter here, but frankly eerie, as much as I support their right to wear whatever they feel like, muhajabbas that are not ugly are extremely rare for my sense of aesthetics.

Lounsbury,

Proved yourself to be the twat as always. I think you value yourself a bit too much mate.

I think your problem is that you feel the need to attack anyone and everyone who might know something more and or different than yourself.

I guess you failed to notice that MSK made the point that the magazine is well known in Egypt and the Levant, but doesnt help prove your argument does it?

Like I said before, I think you are a rather weak man with a rather large mouth on-line. I bet you dont sqeak so loud in person do you? I didnt think so.

Keyboard warriors usually dont.

Sinani boy:

Read for comprehension next time.

Well know to local consumers doesn't say fuck about a parachuted in journo. I already highlighted that re Western context even. Now, that you're a stupid convertitus cunt, well, that is not my problem.

So, do try to pay attention. and if you want to meet in person to try out physicla things, well do say so, cunt.

But let me stop picking on your tedious Khaliji worship-convertitus and return to the key and core point:

(i) Outside journos who don't know the bloody language will NOT ipso facto - on short term assignment (i.e. write an arty in 2 weeks or less) be able to effectively tap into "obvious" local sources - call it the Tommy F problem
(ii) Niche mags however well know in their local niches (as in, e.g. regional fashion, lady/womens, mens, bizness, etc) mags even for relatively well informed observers are NOT obvious.
(iii) Navel gazing whanking "oh of course if someone who'se never seen fuck all of the region pops in for a week or three to write a general arty MUST obviously know about Sayyaditi or whatever specialist pub is at best navel gazing provincialism

Now, since you're suffering from convertitus, and worse yet, Khalij worship, well, I guess I have to excuse you for your aroubiyah but the key point here for you to take away is not that I am an asshole that you'd love to mix it up with (hey why not mate, others have, amuses me really) or that I don't fellate your recently learned Machreqi Arab cultural references, etc.

No, the take away is that in fact one has to have a rational standard about outside observers parachuting in and accessing knowledge.

Now, to be kind to your tedious precious convert Kham self, subjects near and dear to the heart often cause one to lose perspective. I've gone and ranted on about outside financial analysts pissing on about specific issues I am better informed about (re MENA, emerging markets, etc) - one take away I have had is that when one becomes "expert" (meaning reasonably well informed about X subject), one has a tendency to lose perspective. "Of course' people know Cosmo, Sayyidati, [and a dozen womens mags from not Khalij cunt land in Arabic that I suppose I could cite if I felt like going through my women's mags and actually paying attention to the tripe].

The point here, Sinani boy, is that to have a real - as opposed to the whinging "oh us poor victims" - view, you need to pull back and have real context.

Not that I expect you will, but just for the record.

And of course, if you really want to leave Khaliji double Zero context and mix it up, well, just email me at yahoo.

Otherwise, just shut the fuck up and fuck off you stupid whinging cunt.

I wont continue your keyboard warrior tactics. The whinging cunt here is clearly yourself.

If and when you come to the DC area in the future send me an e-mail and I'll be more than happy to sort you out.

If your attitude in real life is the same as it is on-line I am sure you have been sorted out many a time before.

However, as most keyboard warriors such as yourself are meek as mice in person, I doubt you have never gotten the sorting out you need.

Whether or not colorful/modern hijab is Islamically correct or not, it's far more common than the abaya, niqaab, or burqa and I think this is a fabulous idea. Moroccan women are far more likely to wear jeans with a long shirt and a brightly colored hijab than they are an abaya. Even if they choose the traditional route, I've seen women in leopard-print djellabas with matching headscarf.

As for Sayyadat, I've lived in Morocco for some time and have never heard of this magazine. Abu Sinan, how quickly you seem to forget that the Gulf/Levant does not represent the Muslim majority.

Sorted out, eh mate? Whatever floats your boat, or whatever you need.

Now as to substance:

Showing more images of ... well-adjusted women who happen to wear the head scarf hidjab is a good thing.

The entire dispute over the women's mag, and Sinani's tedious Khalij worship, misses the point however. Simply without my poking at the lad, Westerners do not have easy access to such references. Laha, Sayyadati, etc. etc. the numbers of such Arabic language chic mags are out there are perhaps staggering (not being a chic mag consumer myself, I merely wonder at the women getting ripped off by the tripe, but no matter).

For the casual non-Arabophone, who's to know what is representative, etc. Thus my objection to the Sinani's whinging.

At the same time, not sure presenting the images really gets at the problem - as per the rather ingrained attitude in certain quarters (I think of Cat in Rabat) that no hidjab means liberated, hidjab means oppressed (if not expressed or perhaps thought in such clear terms).

Personally I have always thought that leaving aside the Nunnish ninja outfits, a mere headscarf ranges from the merely frumpy and not particularly indicative of anything, to the quite stylish, and speaking to at once self-confidence as well as cultural confidence (not that not wearing a hidjab is not culturally confident either, but I do recall hearing from more than one woman an expression of a thought along the lines of "I wish I had the courage to put the hidjab on, but I want to be modern...." -this being a near direct quote- the core issue not being Hidjab or the inverse is inherently "modern" but rather the individual's approach to the choice (either yes or no) may be "modern".)

As for Sayyadat, I've lived in Morocco for some time and have never heard of this magazine.

It was widespread long years ago in the Maghreb (Tunisia, and to a much lesser extent, Morocco). Not sure about today though. Doesn't make L's point any less valid (minus the child beating, heh).

It's still around, but the pan-Arab mags in general seem to be losing space / readership to localised offerings.

Or so my eyes and what people in the media business tell me when trying to pimp investments. I do believe pan-Arab offerings are losing space to localised ones, and that's not just mere pimpery.

Determined to find Sayyadati, I scoured every magazine rack in the medium-sized Moroccan city where I live yesterday - only one carried it, Lounsbury is correct that the local offerings (which are of sometimes better - or at least less cheesy - quality) have mostly beaten out the pan-Arab ones. A good thing, if you ask me.

But without sucking ass, another good point by Lounsbury - that to the typical North American and perhaps European, it is difficult to sort out what type of hijab represents what - I remember, upon first coming to Morocco and staying in elite Ifrane, only seeing the style represented in the photo above and thinking that niqaabis were rare. Go to Rabat this summer, however, and it seems niqaab is on the rise. Five years ago, I probably couldn't have told you the difference.

Abu Sinan: in terms of western media, Sayyadati is an obscure mag because none of us have bloody heard of it.

I've worked in media here for half a decade and I've never heard for it let alone met anyone who works for it.

Given that Dubai is supposedly the media hub of the region (and most major Middle East launches being held here is testament to that) then the fact that one could be here and be oblivious to this magazine suggests that it is, in fact, obscure beyond its target market.

And the whole point of it being mentioned was in the context of the non-Arab, non-Muslim, western media finding out about the variety of Arab female dress.

Dear all,

I think that the debate here has brought up an interesting question: In MENA, who reads what kind of magazines? (In this particular case, women's magazines) Ya'nii, do Khaliji women, for example, not care about Arabic-language mags at all, since they rather get the fashion tips from "the source" (Western mags like Vogue etc.) and don't care about the Arab gossip? Are Levantine/Egyptian women more "Arab", then?

What about the Maghrib - do Maghrebiennes read more French than Arabic magazines?

I do find it interesting that our dear friend SD has, in half a decade in the Gulf media, never come across "Sayyidaatii". Since she's anything but a daft ignoramous, I assume that in the Gulf that magazine simply doesn't matter.

--MSK*

Dear all,

I think that the debate here has brought up an interesting question: In MENA, who reads what kind of magazines? (In this particular case, women's magazines) Ya'nii, do Khaliji women, for example, not care about Arabic-language mags at all, since they rather get the fashion tips from "the source" (Western mags like Vogue etc.) and don't care about the Arab gossip? Are Levantine/Egyptian women more "Arab", then?

What about the Maghrib - do Maghrebiennes read more French than Arabic magazines?

I do find it interesting that our dear friend SD has, in half a decade in the Gulf media, never come across "Sayyidaatii". Since she's anything but a daft ignoramous, I assume that in the Gulf that magazine simply doesn't matter.

--MSK*

MSK:

Well, readership and media are indeed interesting questions.

Let's start, however, by recognizing (unlike our precious Kham Muslim) that niche maganizes have niche readerships, and if one is not, say, into women's magazines, one may not be aware of their existence.

Next at the same time as the regional segmentation of readership, I would lay good money on the bet that there is strong class association with English or French readership of X magazine type versus the Arabic language equivalent. In the business area, certainly serious people read the European language business / economic news, although besides the class implications there is a real difference in information quality. Even locally produced foreign language press come out with better economic information than the Arabic (which is nearly useless - well that might be changing w CNBC Arabiyah, etc, I confess I gave up reading the Arabic biz pages as a waste of time); I doubt information as such in say fashion mags differs that much between languages. Ergo, I presume readership differences will be there purely image based.

As for the Maghreb, my sensation is that it is similar to Leb Land. For both, I see a strong class orientation in readership - but in the Maghreb several of the local French groups have started up Arabic versions, so they clearly see a niche appeal. The reality, though, is that outside the Gulf, the people with most disposable income who are also most likely to be consumer magazine oriented are also French or English speaking, and there are strong class associations with that.

This may be more of a media article observation, but my other sensation is that pan-Arabic things are losing ground -with exceptions such as the Arab News Sats (All Palestine & Iraq all the Time!)- more rapidly to emerging better quality local or regional media.

Oh hey L, speaking of arab sats, there were a bunch of new/rebranded maghreb-targeting sat channels launching early this year (at least theoretically). Any sense of if they've had an impact? (Mostly spin-offs of various leb/dubai channels, eg. lbc, dubai TV and I think al Arabiya, but then there's the MEDI 1 sat channel as well and a handful of tunisian things that may or may not have actually gone anywhere).

"All Palestine & Iraq all the Time!"

How very true. Now Lebanon is gaining a footing as well. It's ironic how the airwaves are dominated by news from the least populous countries.

Dear Ali,

Apart from the fact that Iraq is hardly one of the "least populous" countries in the region (too lazy to calculate its rank in MENA or Arab League, but with 27 Mio. inhabitants its somewhere in the upper 3rd), Al Jazeera is simply following the generic rule of populist media: If it bleeds it leads.

--MSK*

On the core question:

Oh hey L, speaking of arab sats, there were a bunch of new/rebranded maghreb-targeting sat channels launching early this year (at least theoretically). Any sense of if they've had an impact? (Mostly spin-offs of various leb/dubai channels, eg. lbc, dubai TV and I think al Arabiya, but then there's the MEDI 1 sat channel as well and a handful of tunisian things that may or may not have actually gone anywhere).

Sadly, I have been a boring man, and watching numbers on Excel sheets.... Med1 of course is a Franco-Maghreb effort based off of the long-running quasi independent radio network.

I haven't noticed, though, any 'Maghreb branded' Machreqi stations.