In this ethnography, anthropologist, Lila Abu-lughod presents a set of interesting viewpoints concerning the freedom, or non-freedom experienced by women in the Muslim world. She argues against the common western world velief that women's rights are fringed upon in the Muslim world. Abu-lughod states," when you save someone, you imply that you are saving her from something. You are also saving her to something." I agree with Abu-Lughod's argument that to save someone there has to be something to be saved from. The fact that someone assumes that a foreigner is suffering or being oppressed because they're living in circumstances different to their own is, perhaps, one of the purest examples of Cultural ethnocentrism anyone could find anywhere.…show more content… One of the ways they show their standing is by covering. They decide for whom they feel it is appropriate to veil." Abu-lughod produced this ethnography while practicing Cultural Relativism. She made sure to let her audience know the importance of unserstanding the value of the muslim world and its traditions only when compared to its beliefs and ideas; And completely exclude any western societal norms and values. In other words, the practices of those people were completely valid and acceptable because the women, who were the supposed victims, actually had personal reasons as to why they chose to use head coverings. They did it out of respect for older men, and out of respect for their God. I find it incredible that it's so far removed from the assumption that these women are in desperate need of being freed, when according their holy book they're completely free. In the Muslim.org's article How Islam confirms women's rights by Laleh Bakhtiar she explains that in Islam, "... It is up to a person's free will to choose what to accept as a religious obligation. For some, it is covering of their hair, for others the emphasis is on the inner development of ethical values." She
