If Muslim's Hijab is denied, Why not Hindu's Mangalsutra??
The issue of hijab is not a cheap diversion for the goths who make 'puncture,' they have been misled for centuries by trapping women in the interest of clothes and jewellery. Women's empowerment is deteriorating.
We all know that wearing a hijab is a form of conditioning and compulsion. There is no other option. But you have no idea when you are trapped in the conditioning of Western civilization's markets by declaring jeans, skirts, and trousers to be universally comfortable.
You believe that hijab wearers lack the confidence to assert that their religion requires them to be worn. Then you've heard about the silent girls protesting in karnataka or AMU. She exudes the so-called confidence that you want to see in hijab wearers.
Another issue is that your ears are entangled in the black cloak, in addition to your eyes. When you learn about women's interest and consciousness in their clothing as a universal natural truth.
From a distance, a woman wearing a hijab appears to be a Muslim in an era when the criminal is identified by the clothing. The woman, dressed in a sari, vermilion, mangalsutra, and alata, does not appear Christian, does she? A person wearing a turban does not even appear to be a Buddhist.
You appear to have returned to the era of wearing leaves! Alternatively, the Middle east does not appear on the map. If Ambedkar is considered out of date by the practice of burning copies of the constitution, then in the twenty-first century, there is talk of returning to ancient culture in opposition to the society that has adopted the so-called mediaeval lifestyle. Decisions begin to be made on the street. Is it progressive? (Either of the two)