Hijab is not just for women

I work at an Islamic school in which the dress code for all the teachers as well as the female students from grade 4th and up is the wearing of the abaya and a head scarf. The abaya is an Arab form of modest dress which is basically like a long dress or overcoat that is very loose and hides the shape of the body. For the men and boys, there is no such dress requirement. The male students wear short sleeve polo shirts with cotton pants and the male teachers wear the regular business casual attire, pants and button down shirt. I have never in my life worn an abaya, since it is not part of my culture (I'm not Arab). When I go to the mosque I usually wear loose pants with a tunic that covers my arms and bottom and then a long scarf covering my head, neck, and chest. I had to get an abaya when I started working there. I was told that I could not wear the Indian type dress (loose pants and tunic  that I normally wear and which is considered modest by requirements of Islam). In the meetings some of the teachers have asked to be allowed to wear skirts and long shirt or other forms of dress that is not the abaya. However this idea was not taken because there is a concern that the women will start wearing tight skirts and tight shirts and the abaya which is basically a thin shapeless overcoat covers all that. What irks me about all of this is that the abaya or thobe (long dress like robe worn by Arab men) is not a requirement for the men at the school. One male teacher comes dressed in a tight short sleeve button down shirt that fails in covering his behind and he's usually wearing tight pants. I'm sure if he was to bend down his shirt would go up and his buttocks would stick out. However he like most Muslim men can get away with this even though that is an immodest form of dress. If the abaya is forced on the women then the thobe should be forced on the men. Even the Imam wears office attire with a tie and that is okay. This double standard on rules of Islamic dress for men and women is very frustrating. In the conversations within Muslims, the idea of hijab is all about women. The Imam always reminds the "sisters" to cover more and that hijab is obligatory on believing women. What I never understood is why there is a one-sided analysis of the "hijab"?  According to the dictates of Islam, believing men and women are both enjoined to lower their gaze and to guard their private parts (ie sexual acts outside of marriage) and to dress modestly. All Muslims, men and women have restrictions on the dress, the nakedness should be covered, this extends from the navel to the knees and for the women it is also the chest. However while this is strictly enforced by Muslims for the women, it is rather lax in general for the men. This is seen in the school where I teach and is seen in the society also. Muslim boys are allowed to wear short shorts when competing in sports in school even though it goes against the rules for covering for all Muslims, however this point is never brought up or is even an issue. Boys are allowed to wear shorts that barely reach their knees at times. However for many Muslim girls they have to give up partaking in sports all together because they will have to wear outfits that show off their arms or are bit too tight. Imams never remind the men to dress more modestly. There is never any lecture that says men, you should stop wearing muscle shirts and tight jeans or shorts that reveal the thigh. I've seen many young men coming out of the mosque dressed in this very manner. When will the discussion about hijab including all believing people, men and women. When will the discussion of hijab also include that it is not just physical covering but also covering of the heart and inner soul from the evil around us? I want to have a discussion about that. 

Sharia gone wild

Another case of Sharia gone wild. A case out of Bangladesh this week in which a 14 year old girl was raped by a relative and then sentenced to 100 lashes by the local clerics in her village. The girl died before her sentence was completed. Her relative that raped her fled before he could be punished. This form of punishment is illegal in Bangladesh, and now the high court and government are investigating this case and how such a punishment could be carried out. The thing is while Bangladesh has a secular government, the laws and customs at the local level especially in the villages often go unchecked as was in this case. The media of course has spun this into how sharia is a bad thing that inflicts harsh barbaric punishments often unfair to women. Sharia is one of those words that is often used but the least correctly defined or understood. This case of the young girl being punished is not a case of how bad sharia is and that it should be banned but rather a case of the ignorance of the Muslim world that does not understand its own laws. The principles of sharia does not dictate that people should be punished unjustly. The local clerics are a poorly educated bunch that don't understand their own religious law and were in no place to give a "fatwa". A case that does involve fornication must have four reliable witnesses that actually saw the act, without that there is no case and any accusation is thrown out and those that accuse are punished for spreading lies. This case of the 14 year girl is an example of the ignorance of local officials and their usage of their own backwards customs and not a case of implementation of sharia. Today many Muslims know just about the same about sharia as those that are non-Muslims and that is a scary thing.