It would be against Islam for a woman to show herself (without a head covering) to a man she wasn’t married/related to. This isn’t true for woman and other woman. This person is trans and their friend treated them, through religious tradition, that she accepts her friend as a woman.
Which means, in effect, that their friend is saying “My belief that you are truly a woman is at least as strong as my belief in my god,” which is an incredibly powerful way to validate someone’s identity.
Forgive my ignorance but can anyone explain what happened in this interraction?
It would be against Islam for a woman to show herself (without a head covering) to a man she wasn’t married/related to. This isn’t true for woman and other woman. This person is trans and their friend treated them, through religious tradition, that she accepts her friend as a woman.
Which means, in effect, that their friend is saying “My belief that you are truly a woman is at least as strong as my belief in my god,” which is an incredibly powerful way to validate someone’s identity.
“male attendants with no desire” are also accepted, although I suspect that refers to eunuchs.
depends on the reading, I think, could also refer to gay dudes.
And bears, although there’s some overlap there.
Which is why it didn’t happen lol, especially when the religion and culture is very anti trans.
A wholesome exchange based on the intersection of trans acceptance and religious misogyny!