girlsoprano:

by no means did i mean to gloss over the oppression that undeniably occurs in muslim countires and families--as it does in every culture. as a muslim of course it's of deep concern to me--to see my faith mutilated into a noose for women is very personally infuriating. i was trying--and i see that i totally failed--to not just speak from my individual experience, as a response to the schmidt question. so what i was trying to say is that the hijab was NOT decreed to be a tool of oppression. therefore, it's unfair to impute that meaning to anyone wearing it or accuse us of condoning that stuff. the societal machinations that render hijab a tool of oppression are separate from islam, separate from hijab, and are themselves cuturally contextual.

Totally understood. And I think this did come through in your original post, but I may have been a little careless with my words to make it seem like I didn't get this point. I think you're 100% right here. People who judge the higab harshly from outside simply have no clue about the different things it can mean, both good and bad.

I think it's obvious that you are a deeply thoughtful person -- fair-minded and willing to acknowledge the ugly spots as well as the bright ones. It comes through loud and clear that you chose the veil for the right reasons, and with full awareness of what you were doing. Given all that, I think your taking of the higab speaks more loudly and clearly than any particular argument in either direction on this forum.

Your clarity of voice, and especially your candid acknowledgement of cultural flaws, should be enough to let any outsider know that the veil definitely does NOT mean oppression in your case, and therefore that it must not mean oppression in all cases. I am sure that I'm not the only one to be struck by that.

My comment was not really intended to disagree with you, but just to call attention to the multiplicity of meanings.