AIBU for stopping a nice Muslim girl from showing my son her hair?

It's their culture, which is very different from white Western culture. It's important to accept other cultures and not impose our ways on them. You're viewing the Muslim culture and religion with Western eyes, but you should try to understand it for itself, and not overlay your own culture on it. You think that the hijab is purely about misogyny, but for many, it's deeply spiritual and an outward sign of their devotion to God.

It's their culture, which is very different from white Western culture. It's important to accept other cultures and not impose our ways on them. You're viewing the Muslim culture and religion with Western eyes, but you should try to understand it for itself, and not overlay your own culture on it. You think that the hijab is purely about misogyny, but for many, it's deeply spiritual and an outward sign of their devotion to God.

And just because ONE little girl wore one to hide signs of abuse, to me, is no different to a girl wearing a cardigan to hide bruises on her arms.

The difference being that if it is hot and the girl refuses to take it off you may (should) question it. I am guessing no one suggests a girl takes her hijab off in the heat at your school? Is there a Health and Safety policy to prevent them overheating? Is their play in the sunshine restricted to prevent sunstroke?

It would be grossly offensive to go quizzing every family who put their child in a hijab, just because it MIGHT be hiding signs of abuse.

Isn’t that how safeguarding should work though? If you are aware that a particular item has been used to facilitate abuse and murder, surely some deep thought should be given as to whether it should continue to be used? How many cases would you find acceptable?

Are you satisfied that allowing these young girls to wear a hijab for whatever reason (it’s not an even religious requirement) is worth the risk of it happening again?

Interesting that you try and minimise the issues around her hijab though. It was found that it was quite an important part of hiding her injuries. It would only have taken one person to look at her properly and take the right course of action and she might have escaped months of torture and be alive today. But no one looked under her hijab or questioned why she never took it off.

There are thousands of girls in primary schools across the country who wear a head covering to school.

But why is this happening? They are at primary school? Don’t you support kids being allowed to be kids rather than having a misogynistic ideology imposed on them to say that it is their responsibility to cover their hair/hide themselves in case men can’t control themselves? Why don’t the boys have their freedom curtailed in a similar way?

And just because ONE little girl wore one to hide signs of abuse, to me, is no different to a girl wearing a cardigan to hide bruises on her arms.

The difference being that if it is hot and the girl refuses to take it off you may (should) question it. I am guessing no one suggests a girl takes her hijab off in the heat at your school? Is there a Health and Safety policy to prevent them overheating? Is their play in the sunshine restricted to prevent sunstroke?

It would be grossly offensive to go quizzing every family who put their child in a hijab, just because it MIGHT be hiding signs of abuse.

Isn’t that how safeguarding should work though? If you are aware that a particular item has been used to facilitate abuse and murder, surely some deep thought should be given as to whether it should continue to be used? How many cases would you find acceptable?

Are you satisfied that allowing these young girls to wear a hijab for whatever reason (it’s not an even religious requirement) is worth the risk of it happening again?

Interesting that you try and minimise the issues around her hijab though. It was found that it was quite an important part of hiding her injuries. It would only have taken one person to look at her properly and take the right course of action and she might have escaped months of torture and be alive today. But no one looked under her hijab or questioned why she never took it off.

There are thousands of girls in primary schools across the country who wear a head covering to school.

But why is this happening? They are at primary school? Don’t you support kids being allowed to be kids rather than having a misogynistic ideology imposed on them to say that it is their responsibility to cover their hair/hide themselves in case men can’t control themselves? Why don’t the boys have their freedom curtailed in a similar way?

I wondered if that question might come up.

Short answer, we make no comment one way or the other about why a girl might be in a hijab. The same way we wouldn't ask why they'd decided to wear trousers that day, or a dress. It's just part of their clothing. And most are fairly casual about it at the primary school age.
The girl I referenced with the ear we needed access to, today she "lost her hijab in the lunch hall". When she came back with it, she chose not to put it back on for the rest of the afternoon.
The other little girl in my class who wears one, randomly had her ponytail sticking out the back of hers! Their desire to wear it, or how strict to be, seems to vary with their moods and the weather.

The school I work in is very multicultural, and represents the demographic of the wider town quite well.
There are thousands of girls in primary schools across the country who wear a head covering to school. And just because ONE little girl wore one to hide signs of abuse, to me, is no different to a girl wearing a cardigan to hide bruises on her arms.

What happened to little Sara is an absolute horror, and I'd be first in line to beat her father with a metal pole if I got the chance. There were a lot more missed moments in Sara's case, than just her suddenly turning up in a hijab. It would be grossly offensive to go quizzing every family who put their child in a hijab, just because it MIGHT be hiding signs of abuse.

Out of interest, does your school do anything to try and determine how the girls feel about having to wear these head coverings? Any safeguarding policy?

Do you try and determine if there is coercion or conditioning or any other ulterior motive like in the case of Sara Sharif who was put in a hijab to hide regular signs of the physical abuse she suffered before her father ultimately murdered her?

Is it possible that lessons have not been learned from the circumstances that led to her murder? What has changed to stop it happening again?

Services in Surrey failed to identify that Sara was at risk of abuse and did not question unexplained bruising, the review, external found. This included a failure to properly investigate why Sara started wearing a hijab - that covered the bruising - for "fear of causing offence".
….
The review also found it was not properly investigated why Sara started wearing a hijab, saying a newly qualified occupational therapist was reluctant to mention it for "fear of causing offence". It was later learned that she wore one to hide her injuries.
Neighbours also said they "feared being branded as being racist" if they reported concerns.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crmx0ge18d8o?app-referrer=deep-link

I think you did exactly the right thing.

I'm a primary school teacher, currently teaching Year 5, and have two girls in my class who wear head coverings.
Only a couple of weeks ago, we needed to take the temperature via the ear of one of them. We asked her if she wanted to go into a separate room so she could move her hijab out of the way without boys potentially seeing her hair. She did.

It's just being respectful of other cultures. And now your son knows that it's impolite for an unrelated male to see a girls hair. It's just a manners lesson. If he wants to be huffy about it, that's his problem.

I think you did exactly the right thing.

I'm a primary school teacher, currently teaching Year 5, and have two girls in my class who wear head coverings.
Only a couple of weeks ago, we needed to take the temperature via the ear of one of them. We asked her if she wanted to go into a separate room so she could move her hijab out of the way without boys potentially seeing her hair. She did.

It's just being respectful of other cultures. And now your son knows that it's impolite for an unrelated male to see a girls hair. It's just a manners lesson. If he wants to be huffy about it, that's his problem.

You may or may not think enforcing a rule about going to the park is reasonable. The park may be next door and you may allow your child to go. You may privately think the other parents are over protective and stifling their child's independence with the rule.
When you host other people's children it's far from unusual to find their parents have different rules about all sorts of things than you do. Screens, diet, limits on freedom.
My point is that most people will respect the other parents rule rather than create an unfortunate situation whereby you are allowing a child to do something their parents may be displeased with them about.
Its not your place to send 'messages about freedom of choice' to children in your care on a play date when you have no idea whether the child is allowed that freedom. Be it the park, what they may eat or how they may be clothed. That's a huge overstep when casually hosting a child.
And yes, if your principles are so strong you feel compelled to message them to another person's child, when this might be contrary to the way their parents are lawfully choosing to raise them, it would be better for you not to host the child.
Because whether you like it or not, our society places the responsibility for decisions regarding children with their parents, not with casual acquaintances. And unless there is harm or neglect, that has to be respected.

I don’t accept your ‘similarity’ though. Enforcing a rule about not going to the park is about a child’s welfare and a reasonable rule to be respected.

It is amazing that you think that if OP was uncomfortable enforcing this somewhat questionable rule (not a religious requirement, not a cultural requirement for a girl her age etc etc) that she should have not allowed her to come into the house.

That’s pretty harsh on the girl. It doesn’t send her a positive message about her personal freedom of choice either.

No, we didn't used to judge arranged/forced marriage and FGM because that was their culture. And in the past we didn't oppose sati, because that was a cultural practice.

Yes. That's why I suggested a slightly different approach.

But that wasn’t OPs intention. If she had intended to give her a minute to think that she could have addressed herself to her DS and given the girl the opportunity to either say yes or no as she chose. OP decided to enforce whatever rule has been imposed on this girl and remove her choice.

Making a girl keep an age inappropriate headcovering on is not the same as letting kids go to the park. HTH.

I simply meant a 10 year old is old enough to decide what to do herself BUT 10 year olds do lots of things without thinking and it would have given her a minute to pause and think about it.

I imagine they think its a good thing when hosting a child to supervise them in accordance with what they believe would be the parents wishes.
Like if you knew a visiting child wasn't allowed to go to the park without an adult you'd probably tell them to stay in your garden.
Its a sound principle to follow when hosting children, which people typically adhere to I'd have thought?

I am asking this in a positive spirit but I am genuinely bemused as to why do people think that OP reinforcing a misogynistic set of social rules (there is no equivalent for boys) is a good thing?

What if she wanted to take it off? Why would OP tell her not to? Is this people keen to demonstrate how tolerant and understanding they are towards a different culture (that also uses coverings to oppress women en masse) but those kind intentions have now tipped over into enforcement on behalf of the belief holders?

“Modesty” … I suppose children have their hair uncovered are” immodest” - who sexualises children like this ? It’s revolting.

BTW … no seen many boys covering thier heads up - maybe it’s just the hair of Girls and Women that have magical properties.

Misogyny on every level

I also hate the idea of “modest” .. like women who don’t cover are “immodest” and therefore is serves them right when men can’t control themselves.

That's your thoughts. Are you one of these people who think we in the UK know better? You don't have to agree with something to respect someone else's choice.

Yes, this label of ‘nice Muslim girl’ is interesting. Why is ‘nice’ the word that OP selected and what are the implications?

Interestingly, I have only heard this phrase used by Muslim families themselves in order to differentiate with the ‘not nice’ or less ‘well behaved’ non Muslim girls. DDs Muslim friends are very limited in who they are allowed to hang out with.

This is a differentiation widely reported by rape gang victims as well. They were targeted because they were white and seen as a legitimate target.