Noor Tagouri and a needless dose of outrage

I came across a little storm on the internet over this recent weekend, Noor Tagouri - an American Muslim broadcaster in her early twenties was apparently interviewed by Playboy magazine as a Renegade/rising star in broadcast media (I'm not linking to it but I'm sure if you really wanted to find it, you could). She has an online following on Instagram and Twitter like any nascent celebrity should and proudly and vocally wears the hijab/scarf. This last bit is important to note to understand the storm.

Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about Noor Tagouri and hadn't heard of her until this week and this is all from Google as she's not a serious enough celebrity yet to have her own Wikipedia page. I haven't read the Playboy interview either as I want to approach this from the theoretical point of view of the standard angry Twitter user/keyboard warrior.

This is Noor Tagouri. Image taken from Aquila Style

The little storm I mentioned is the storm that's blown up over whether, as a hijab-wearing Muslim woman who has pursued a life direction which puts her in the public eye, Noor should have agreed to be interviewed by Playboy magazine - a magazine which is world renowned for its appeal to the baser needs of men. It's also caused people who were comfortable and complacent in their own practice and life to ask questions of what hijab means.

My own personal view on the matter is that I don't really care. This is a stance I take on most celebrity news stories so there's nothing new here.

It is interesting though to observe the storm that's developed amongst the online Muslim community. Based on the number of different articles and sources I've seen posted, it's definitely generated a lot of commentary and a large number of strong opinions being formed by what seems to be all sides. For example, there's people saying she's being a brave Muslim and others calling her a disgraceful Muslim, some saying that it's raising and normalising hijab awareness and other saying it makes a mockery of the hijab.

Controversy by its very definition is divisive and polarises opinion. But controversy is also very fascinating and as a PR move this episode has certainly raised awareness of Noor in the Muslim community. With the wider public who pay attention to such matters, this will help Noor break further into being seen as mainstream personality. But my feeling is that most of the casual 'readers' of Playboy magazine likely won't be paying attention to the magazine text so possibly awareness with these fellows will be limited.

From what I can observe people on both sides of the 'debate' are stirred by the same thing: Noor has taken her Islamic hijab to places it wouldn't be expected. Some call it brave and support her, others call it unnecessary and don't support her. Others still call it dangerous and a betrayal and vilify her.

Playboy is known for its exploitation of immodesty so it's a fair question to ask if a person pushing a modest agenda should feature in it (for an interview not a risqué photoshoot). Seemingly it's a direct contradiction with the modest purpose of the hijab. You can have your opinion and form your own judgement on this question. The simplicity of the question also makes it a very easy one with which to take one of multiple moral high grounds and there's nothing people like more than seizing the moral high ground.

The pro-moral high ground is that she's done it to challenge stereotypes and make the hijab more mainstream in the USA and to show that Muslim women are empowered and boost awareness and improve mainstream attitudes towards Islam.

The anti-moral high ground is that her actions are not modest and she has a young, impressionable following and by associating with a famously immodest magazine she's undermining what it means to be an empowered Muslim woman and also going against Islamic teaching and practice of modesty.

In this instance, both sides have a reasonable case and which particular moral high ground you take you really depends on your own whim and circumstance and your attitude to being outraged. The anti- high ground offers more opportunity for outrage and personal feeling so it's unsurprising that lots of people have taken this stance. The pro- high ground requires a more circumspect view and offers less immediate outrage gratification but allows you to get outraged at the stance that the anti- moral high grounders have taken.

I personally find it hard to get outraged anymore in the modern world we live in where hyperbole and extreme reaction are becoming more and more normal.

I don't feel strongly about this issue at all but I'd say Noor should live her life based on what she feels is right and not be worried about what her more outspoken followers would like her to do based on the lives that they lead. Whatever she does, people will talk and judge and she'll have to live with whatever the worldly outcome may be and the departure or arrival of followers and supporters.

Her intention is her own though and, according to Islamic tradition, that will be judged by Allah (God). The rest of us can comment and criticise or support or not care either way and, so long as comment is respectful, let the non-outraged discussions and explorations continue!

Previous article: YMLP Reunion 2016
Next article: Qibla and reliance on technology