Jump to comment:
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
Dear Editors
It hurts me, my wife and daughters (and every practicing Muslim on the face of earth) to read such discrimination and downgrading of a muslim tradition that subscribed in Quran and sunnah (teaching of the prophet). In Islam it is a woman’s choice if she would follow the teachings of God. The practice is also followed by Abrahimic religions that came from the same source but people deviated after that. You could still view this in Traditional Jewish and in the Vatican.
Thank you for removing such blunder from your respectable medical journal
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Please Stop Attacking Our Beloved HijabRE: Please Stop Attacking Our Beloved Hijab
When are media platforms, governments, politicians, people of authority, and all islamaphobic persons going to understand that hijab is beautiful and that attacking it only represents how uneducated the person is? Learn about it then speak against it. We love our hijab with our entirety and our kids love wearing it and choose to do so. No one forces them and the girl in the picture probably told her mom in the morning before going to school that she wanted to wear it so she can look like her and because it’s beautiful. Stop generalizing and stop showcasing Hijab as an oppressive thing. In fact, YOU are being oppressive by publishing such articles which adds on to the already existing hatred against Hijab and Islam, which unfortunately eventually leads to laws banning it. We love our hijab, we wear it because it represents our identity and beliefs, and no one has the right to tell us otherwise or force us to think otherwise.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
December 21, 2021
Dear CMAJ Editors:
Re: “Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion”
As Muslim and non-Muslim advocates for true inclusion and diversity in Canada and in Canadian healthcare, we were greatly disappointed by Dr. Sherif Emil’s letter and CMAJ’s decision to publish this letter describing the hijab as an “instrument of oppression”.
Dr. Emil falsely equivalates wearing a hijab with “institutionalized child rape” and the systemic oppression of girls and women in some countries – but a man or a Canadian medical journal commenting on the decision of women to wear (or not wear) a hijab is itself an example of how societies work to oppress women.
Dr. Emil conflates Islam and predominately Muslim countries with sexism without mentioning the multiple ways that nearly all organized monotheistic religions and Western societies police the ‘modesty’ of women and girls without holding the individuals and systems that rape, assault, target, and oppress these same women and girls accountable. Blaming articles of clothing rather than the men and systems who inflict the abuse is, in our view, uneducated, misinformed, and, in this case, xenophobic. We empathize with all women and girls who suffer abuse, harassment, and discrimination, but we do not accept the demonization of an expression of faith or an article of clothing rather than the patriarchal institutions that perpetuates these abuses.
Rather t...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: Kerri Johannson MD MPH FRCPC Calgary AB Canada Kate Colizza MD FRCPC ISAM Calgary AB Canada Dilpriya Kaur Mangat MD FRCPC, Calgary AB Canada Caroline O’Shaughnessy MD FRCPC, Calgary AB Canada Man-Chiu Poon MD, MSc, FRCPC. Calgary AB Canada Amita Mahajan MD FRCPC, Calgary AB Canada Doreen Rabi MD MSc FRCPC, Calgary, AB Canada Maysoon Eldoma MD FRCPC, Calgary, AB, Canada Zahra Goodarzi MD MSc FRCPC, Calgary, AB, Canada Anna Cameron MD MS FRCSC, Calgary, AB, Canada Jori Hardin, MD, FRCPC, Calgary AB, Canada Inka Toman, MD MSc FRCPC, Edmonton, AB, Canada Kelly Zarnke, MD MSc FRCPC, Calgary AB Canada Jane Lemaire MD FRCPC, Calgary, AB Canada Bonnie Meatherall MD MSc FRCPC DTM&H, Calgary, AB Canada Sachin R. Pendharkar, MD MSc FRCPC, Calgary, AB Canada Michelle Keir, MD, MSc, FRCPC, Calgary, AB CanadaReferences
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
These kinds of articles encourage Islamophobia and lead to more hateful act and crimes against innocent Muslims who have very right to live in Canada peaceful. Hijab is not an operation for Muslim women, it is a symbol of modesty and freedom of choice that Islam gives to women. The integrity of this article is in question because the writer is not Muslim nor a woman.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- LIK 0L5
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
As a physician who provides refugee health to a diverse and substantial Muslim population from across the globe, it is disheartening both that these opinions exist and that our national body would even allow the publication of such an egregious opinion. As a Canadian I believe wholeheartedly in cultural pluralism. While I disagree with the imposition of the hijab on unwanting girls (or any other head, face or body covering), it’s important to recognize that young girls of all backgrounds are given messaging and are following norms on what clothing is and isn’t appropriate from a young age. Girls of all creeds will challenge and accept what they choose to wear as they get older. Some girls continue to wear a hijab, some don’t. Some girls continue to wear skirts, some wear only pants. And some girls continue to wear their hair long, and others go short. This image has nothing to do with “liberalism”, but a display of the pluralism and multiculturalism of our society. Parents are free to dress their children as they choose, and to imply that they must follow certain norms but not others is oppressive in itself. To imply that only a girl who dons a hijab has is taught a “responsibility to hide her features from the opposite sex” is simply miopic, as we meanwhile teach girls to cover other parts of their bodies or to use different changerooms. Whether it’s covering the hair, or the shoulders, or the legs, our norms ultimately influence our decisions to dress and so long as ther...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Dec 20 letterRE: Dec 20 letter
Very anomalous article with false and disturbing claims. To take full responsibility the article needs to be removed from your website.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: YOU SHOULD RESIGN and let me tell you whyRE: YOU SHOULD RESIGN and let me tell you why
Here is the reason by your own admission:
“ I should point out that the title of the letter was authored by the CMAJ and was not the responsibility of Dr. Emil.”
I was shocked to read this though you have tried to soften/bury this in your letter of apology. It speaks volumes about you/CMAJ. This proves that the publication was not an oversight. In fact, your or your team glorified it with a “catchy” headline to have the utmost impact, suggesting you agreed with the content ….that’s fine and it’s your right on a personal level. But it doesn’t give you the right to propagate, facilitate and glorify bigotry in the journal. By coming up with the most hurtful title (which in my opinion is worse than the content) you did all that.
Hope this conveys the reason clearly why I feel you should take the responsibility for your deliberate action. Rest of the items have proposed can be undertaken later by your successor.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for McMaster condemns Islamophobic stereotypingMcMaster condemns Islamophobic stereotyping
We join as professional colleagues at McMaster University to express our concern with the publication of Dr. Emil’s letter, and recognize the CMAJ’s swift retractions. In our view, the letter was misogynistic and Islamophobic as it propagated stereotypes of Muslim women and the Islamic faith, and oversimplified issues of cultural, political, and religious identity and agency. We stand together against stereotypes of any kind that paint individuals from different cultures and backgrounds with a single brush stroke. This is particularly important in CMAJ, which is an influential Canadian medical journal. To circumvent such propagation, there is an urgent need for in-depth training that advances equity, diversity, inclusion, as well as the sovereign rights of Indigenous people within medical and health curricula. Furthermore, institutional commitment is required for the infrastructure and capacity-building necessary to address systemic barriers.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for Hypocrisy of CMAJ exposedHypocrisy of CMAJ exposed
The CMAJ pretends to carry the torch for social justice, diversity and inclusion. This publication has you exposed as the hypocrites you truly are, CMAJ editors. Never would I imagined that you, CMAJ, would grant Dr. Emil the highest of medical platforms to disseminate something so obviously unacceptable. Shame on you.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: False information mentioned in this articleRE: False information mentioned in this article
Yesterday, I had the misfortune of stumbling across this letter posted in the CMAJ by a pediatric surgeon who believes being from an Eastern culture gives him the excuse to be openly bigoted and Islamophobic. Long story short, he is triggered by the fact that another article had the audacity to use the image of a girl in hijab, and then goes on a long rant about how the hijab is fundamentally a symbol of oppression and should be censored.
The hijab is a symbol for Muslim women, we wear it to honour our own traditions and faith the same way my Sikh friends wear their turbans. To insinuate that we are oppressed into wearing this is playing on Islamophobic tropes that Muslim women like myself have been subjected to ever since the early 2000s.
The author of this article claims that head coverings are only worn in the strictest of conservative households, which is simply not true. The hijab is a part of Islamic religion and rooted in theology, regardless of how conservative or liberal a family is. And moreover, it is still our choice to wear it or not. I myself did not wear a head covering for a solid chunk of my early career, only putting one on as my relationship with my religion changed and I matured as a Muslim and a doctor. Likewise, my daughter does not wear a headscarf, and when or if she does will be a matter of her choice, not mine or my husband’s.
All these facts are known to anyone who has Muslim friends or colleagues, as I’m sure Dr. Emil does....
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for Apology from CMAJ's interim Editor-in-Chief on behalf of the CMAJApology from CMAJ's interim Editor-in-Chief on behalf of the CMAJ
I sincerely apologize on behalf of the CMAJ for my error in publishing the letter by Dr. Emil, which did not contain appropriate subject matter for publication by the CMAJ and which has disgusted many readers across Canada. I sincerely apologize for the considerable hurt that so many people, including medical colleagues and learners, have experienced from reading the letter. I take full responsibility for the inadequacy of editorial process that led to this error. Furthermore, I should point out that the title of the letter was authored by the CMAJ and was not the responsibility of Dr. Emil.
CMAJ is formally retracting the letter.
The CMAJ's Editorial Advisory Board, on whom some critics have called to account for the letter's publication, are never involved in the selection of articles, including letters, for publication.
CMAJ will always respect and support the right of women to choose to dress as they wish.
Further, CMAJ editors will urgently review the journal's processes for considering, reviewing and publishing submitted letters; we will act to ensure proper rigour through a process that seeks to reduce bias, with necessary checks and balances.
In March 2021 I committed the CMAJ to anti-racism (...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Disgusting and Hate FilledRE: Disgusting and Hate Filled
Your professionalism is showing alright... Disappointing how low our professional standards have stooped.
Competing Interests: False information and hateful Islamophobic content...References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
Dr. Emil's abhorrent islamophobic views are not as problematic as the editorial board deeming his clearly bigoted thoughts being acceptable to be published. We (muslim Canadian physicians) refuse to be othered by people such as Dr. Emil.
This bigoted letter coming at a time when a fellow Canadian has lost her job as a school teacher because of her choice to wear a hijab in Quebec. Its racist law banning outward displays of religion targets muslim women more than any other demographic yet there seems to be hardly any organized movement against this.
If CMAJ does truly believe in equity and that racism kills - as aptly professed by the BLM movement - we will need to address this elephant in the room of racism in Quebec by people like Dr. Emil and others in positions of power.
I look forward to clear response from my journal and my CMA dissociating itself from these abhorrent views of a bigot with a clear apology. Over the long term, the editorial board needs to reflect the diverse body of Canadian physicians, including Muslim women to ensure such racist drivel is not allowed to be published in the future.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppressionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression
As a Muslim Associate Professor and Director of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion at my University, I was very disappointed when I read this letter. It reflect the lack of knowledge and professionalism from the author and the editorial team who approved to publish and spread this wrong information. We should not talk about diversity and inclusion before learning about facts or at least ask before spreading false information. This letter should be retracted because of the inaccurate information.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Seriously folks..RE: Seriously folks..
This journal has a responsibility to review and investigate how harmful and offensive content, disguised as reasonable discourse has met editorial standards. The author has not even made a veiled attempt at staying neutral on his prejudiced beliefs and has focused instead on an image of the article. A disingenuous rant over a photo was worth publishing and giving a platform?
Seriously?Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Harm, reparation and positive changeRE: Harm, reparation and positive change
I am writing in response to the letter triggered by a photo of a girl wearing a hijab. The author evoked anger within the Canadian Muslim community and our allies, some calling for retraction and dismissal of the editor responsible for its publication.
Show More
I am one voice from the Canadian Muslim medical community. I believe this letter and its publication in CMAJ, with the alleged intent to be the voice of women who feel wronged by the hijab, is harmful. Ironically, it serves to amplify existing prejudice and reinforce harmful Islamophobic biases in Canada. The title is particularly harmful as it implies CMAJ has taken a position on the issue.
Our community is no different from others whose opinions, expressions and beliefs vary drastically. Validating the voices of women offended by the photo could have been done without generalizing to the entire religious and cultural collective and further alienating the Muslim community. This is especially crucial in the context of extreme acts of violence and terrorism against the Canadian Muslim community, and implementation of Quebec’s Bill 21 and its recent consequence of a teacher losing employment.
I do not expect the non-Muslim community to know the intricacies of diverse beliefs and practices within our community, and to understand why some are offended by this photo while others are not. After all, in attempting to illustrate diversity, one uses symbols, and the hijab is to many, the most...Competing Interests: I am the spouse of Dr. Matthew Stanbrook, Deputy editor, CMAJ. He did not contribute to or review this letter.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for CMAJ and RacismCMAJ and Racism
I am saddened to read the opinion piece “Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion” by Dr. Sherif Emil in the latest edition of CMAJ.1
Calling the content of this article as stereotypical and uninformed would be an understatement. It is racist, ignorant, and Islamophobic. I cannot imagine the hurt this has caused, especially to our colleagues in medicine who choose to wear the hijab.
This is not to diminish the experiences of those, like the surgical trainee, who shared her trauma of being forced to wear the hijab. That was wrong and should not be condoned. However, oppression does not exist in a vacuum. There are psychological, social, economic, political, ethnic, and cultural contextual factors at play. It is not appropriate to use this experience to generalize and demonize an entire faith, which preaches peace and a duty to help those oppressed.
To be clear, Dr. Emil has the right to hold and express his views. They seem more appropriate for a tabloid than a medical journal. The fact that the team at CMAJ allowed such an article to pass the peer-review process is a stain on its impeccable reputation as a world leading medical journal. This was an error in judgement and highlights the need for education and inclusion of more diverse voices at every step of the research process.
Dr. Patrick, editor-in-chief at CMAJ, had stated in a recent editorial on CMAJ and antiracism, “I expect readers of CMAJ to hold...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Kirsten Patrick. CMAJ and antiracism. CMAJ. 2021;193(13):E453-E454. doi:10.1503/cmaj.210494
- Page navigation anchor for RE: AwfulRE: Awful
This is not what Canada is about. The young girls that want to pursue their goals in the medical field should not have the thought over their head that people give more importance on what's on their head instead of what's in their head.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- M4C 5L6
- Page navigation anchor for Nothing short of an apology and retraction would be acceptableNothing short of an apology and retraction would be acceptable
I am writing this letter to express my deep concerns regarding your publishing of the noted article.
In a time when we are seeking to celebrate diversity, and promote equity and inclusion, I find it troubling that you would allow such hate filled, ignorant and prejudiced material in the CMAJ. This material is not researched, is biased and presents false information. The experiences of a few are not representative of the majority. Publishing such false and hateful material will only lead to further marginalization and discrimination of women who choose to wear the hijab.
As a practicing physician of muslim faith, I am deeply hurt by this piece being published. Nothing short of an apology and retraction would be acceptable.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: CMAJ- an instrument in promoting IslamophobiaRE: CMAJ- an instrument in promoting Islamophobia
What’s the connection of this Islamophobic discourse with medical research? The journal has already damaged itself and has no other option than retracting this irrelevant, and highly offensive piece of writing.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: When they are told, “Do not spread corruption in the land,” they reply, “We are only peace-makers!”RE: When they are told, “Do not spread corruption in the land,” they reply, “We are only peace-makers!”
It is extremely appalling for a physician to think it's ok for him to voice his opinions, reflective of whatever background he came from, in a scientific journal. It is even more horrendous to think that this was done in a so-called peer reviewed journal. Shame on cmaj for publishing such an article. What value does the author's regurgitation of baseless claims add to the scientific community? If anything, his false claims that hijab is a symbol of oppression do nothing but to entrench a deeper bias already present in so many parts of Canada. Especially in light of what is going on with bill 21. And his claims that he supports Muslim women who choose to cover up are nothing but sugar-coating his hate-filled poison of an article.
Very disappointed to see this published in a scientific journal. And since his article "went there" and involved religion. I'd like to remind the author (if he's truly Muslim) of these verses, lest he turns to be such a person:
Allah almighty said what can be translated as:
"There is sickness in their hearts, and Allah ˹only˺ lets their sickness increase. They will suffer a painful punishment for their lies. When they are told, “Do not spread corruption in the land,” they reply, “We are only peace-makers!” Indeed, it is they who are the corruptors, but they fail to perceive it."
(Quran 2:10-12)Competing Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Perpetuating IslamophobiaRE: Perpetuating Islamophobia
To whom it may concern,
I want to express my outrage as a Muslim-American woman on behalf of my Canadian Muslim sisters at the article that was published stereotyping hijab. This article should be redacted, or at the very least, amended, and the author should speak to a Muslim woman in the fitness industry such as Zehra Allibhai, @zallibhai on Instagram.
People like you make it harder to women like me to exist. You make it harder for me to feel safe, to have an opinion. I am not oppressed. I am currently learning kickboxing. I’ve never been told by anyone that I can’t engage in physical fitness. Actually, I have: by people like you who are trying to perpetuate a false narrative.
Quit trying to “free” me. You are, in fact, oppressing me.
Do better.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for CMAJ: Muslim children should not be seen nor heard.CMAJ: Muslim children should not be seen nor heard.
I am absolutely shocked to see CMAJ give a platform to an article that is full of alt-right and Islamophobic tropes under the cloak of "think about the children".
CMAJ felt that it was appropriate enough to publish that Muslim hijabi women are not allowed to ride a bike or go swimming? Young muslim girls are told they are sex objects? Has the author or the editor ever been to a park in a major city in Canada?
To try to erase representation of Muslims is something that the community has tried to overcome for the last 20 years. For the CMAJ to suggest that representing Muslim girls is a "two-sides to the issue" controversy is offensive and suggestive of a total lack of cultural awareness. Is there no concern for EDI within CMAJ? Or are Muslims considered "second-class" enough that it doesn't apply to them?
Absolutely shocking from a journal that is held in such high-regards within the medical community in Canada.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Emil S. Don't use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ. 2021 Dec 20;193(50):E1923.RE: Emil S. Don't use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ. 2021 Dec 20;193(50):E1923.
Dr. Emil’s commentary on the the hijab - a social construct with diverse meanings - highlights the pervasive role that gender, religion, culture, race, and discrimination play as social determinants of health (1). The problem lies in the patriarchal and colonial undertones that it is acceptable to force decisions on women that pertain to their bodies. It is unfortunate to hear of the experience of the surgical trainee whom Dr. Emil mentions was forced to wear hijab. Close to home, it is also unfortunate that Bill 21 dictates what a woman can wear on her head at work (2). When will we accept that a woman is a person who can actually think for herself, and can make her own decisions about her hair attire?
Sadly, Dr. Emil’s stereotyped description of women in hijab underscores the immersive existence of implicit biases amongst healthcare providers (3). We have to be cognizant that implicit biases can impact healthcare delivery, the patient-doctor relationship and perpetuate healthcare inequities (4). It is disappointing that Dr. Emil’s likening of the hijab to institutional child rape and child abuse were not recognized by CMAJ as disturbing islamophobic rhetoric. I hope that this experience is taken as a call to action for CMAJ to develop strategies to mitigate implicit bias. This necessitates pointing out that women and minorities are underrepresented in editorial boards of medical journals (5). I hope that CMAJ will commit to being a safe forum for healthy academic...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- 1. Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- 2. Syed, IUB. (2013). Forced Assimilation is an unhealthy policy intervention: the case of the hijab ban in France and Quebec, Canada. International journal of human rights. 17(3): 428-440.
- 3. FitzGerald C, Hurst S. Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review. BMC Med Ethics. 2017 Mar 1;18(1):19.
- 4. Marcelin JR, Siraj DS, Victor R, Kotadia S, Maldonado YA. The Impact of Unconscious Bias in Healthcare: How to Recognize and Mitigate It. J Infect Dis. 2019 Aug 20;220(220 Suppl 2):S62-S73.
- 5. Salazar JW, Claytor JD, Habib AR, Guduguntla V, Redberg RF. Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation of Editors at Leading Medical and Scientific Journals: A Cross-sectional Survey. JAMA Intern Med. 2021 Sep 1;181(9):1248-1251.
- Page navigation anchor for CMAJ complicit in promotion of islamophobia and misogynyCMAJ complicit in promotion of islamophobia and misogyny
Sherif Emil's letter displays ignorance, islamophobia, and misogyny. Shocking and disgraceful this made the pages of the CMAJ. The fact the the EIC encouraged such a piece shows how systemic this problem is at CMAJ, and the fact the no action has been taken further reinforces the complicity with which the journal is now ensnared in. The CMAJ should use this as an example to learn from, improve and address the serious lack of judgment here. A full investigation, disclosure, and action should be undertaken. This letter has no place in our medical literature and should be retracted along with an editorial. Thousands are waiting to see what CMAJ will do. It's sad that his actually happened in 2021, and in Canada.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
As a Muslim Canadian wearing the hijab, I am disheartened & disgusted by this article. It is severely inaccurate, shows a lack of understanding of Islam, and is downright Islamophobic.
Please consider a formal apology for the harm you inflicted on the Muslim community as well as the retraction of this disrespectful letter, which has no place in your journal.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for For CMAJ Editor/Reviewers.. what were you thinking??For CMAJ Editor/Reviewers.. what were you thinking??
I read the article after my daughter who wears a hijab, and is a resident physician forwarded it to me. That it is misinformed piece with information that is regurgitated by some individuals of a particular mindset is not surprising. It is shocking and disgusting that a journal of your calibre will publish it. I wonder who reviewed it as my personal experience with submitting manuscripts to CMAJ over many years is that the reviewers are extremely rigorous. Is this kind of bigotry you want to be disseminated to your readers? Would you accept articles on other religions that have various kinds of headgear worn by children/minors? Would you print an article that called them items of oppression, submission or subjugation as the child can’t provide consent?
In addition to a retraction, a full inquiry into the acceptance/publication of this article is warranted with results disseminated to the readership in a timely fashion.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
This response is inaccurate. It represents a subjective view from a minority that comes from an oppressive household or society. The majority of the Muslim population views the Hijab as a symbol of empowerment for women. It’s embarrassing as a Muslim Dentist that the CMAJ would publish this and politicize dentistry, especially when Islamophobia is at all all time high!!
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: perfect example of racismRE: perfect example of racism
This is a perfect example of racism! Plain wrong - this person has some stereotype in mind about hijabi....Remove this nonsense! Penalize the author, reviewers and the editor who accepted this _ and communicate this clearly on your website AND APOLOGIZE!!!
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: this article needs to be removedRE: this article needs to be removed
Dear editor and publisher. I am very shocked by the decision to write such a letter that is full of hatred towards religion. No religious symbol should be criticized by the human rights code!! If I see a Sikh kid, a Christian or Jewish children mimicking the attire of their parents (am I suppose to call this oppressive??) no. I respect all faiths and I see it as a sign of family tradition. Doctors should not have biased opinions otherwise we cannot be impartial and our patients’ care will suffer . Please apologize for the publication and remove it , screen every future publication carefully. We do not want an apology about how we as Muslim feel , we want a sincere apology for why you published such a biased, hate filled letter.
Thanks
Dr. Bachir TazkarjiCompeting Interests: NoneReferences
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion Sherif EmilRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion Sherif Emil
I read your article. It's well written. And I respect your opinion on the hijab. You have acknowledged both sides of it. But that's it, that's your opinion. It has no place in actual journalism. By your argument, a proud hijab-wearing Muslim should never be represented in any marketing material. Their faces and opinions will never be shown. They will not be part of the diversity fabric of Canada. Their images will be excluded from every magazine, every newsletter, every video just because you have decided it is an 'instrument of opression'. Your opinion on the Hijab does automatically change the meaning and purpose behind the people who wear that and participate in sport and normal life (especially in Canada). It is absolutely okay to see the hijab and understand they are part of society rather than shutting them down or never allowing them to visible. Trying to shut down imagery of Hijabis, you, sir have become the opressor here.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: sorry to read and hear such a rubbishRE: sorry to read and hear such a rubbish
Please stay away of our religion.just focus on your career and what you are graduated for..stay in your lines and dont cross it.As a Hijabi women I am not waiting you to come and tell me what to do of my body what to wear and what to do.I am waiting that you find solutions for the medical system of Canada that might helps people here.And one more advice,go look proparely in the dictionnaire what opression means.as I think you don t get it
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: My HijabRE: My Hijab
As a Muslim female physician and martial arts instructor who has proudly worn a hijab for almost 20 years, I was deeply affected by the CMAJ’s decision to publish a misinformed article by Dr. Emil regarding the hijab on December 20, 2021. I am not oppressed by my hijab and choose to wear it. I had intended to write to you sooner but have been unable to put my thoughts on paper due to how alienated, upset and hurt this article has made me feel. It has brought up many past experiences I have had with islamophobia during my life. As such, I have decided to share a poem with you instead in the hopes that you share this with your readers to counter the blatant islamophobia that was allowed to be published in one of Canada’s leading medical journals.
My Hijab
Mama,
I love your flowy hijab,
with beautiful patterns,
that you wear on your head.
Can I wear one too?Daughter,
this is your choice,
your right,
as you embark on your life’s journey.
Hold your head up,
wear it with pride,
and refuse to succumb to the words of others.***
“Terrorist!”
I hear while dribbling a basketball down the court.“Go back to where you came from!”
I hear while walking down the street.“She can’t fight with that on her head!”
I hear while preparing from my next black belt tournament.“You can’t read that book because you identify with Islamic extremism.”
Show More
I hear...Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for CMAJ Editorial Board should explain how such a piece got publishedCMAJ Editorial Board should explain how such a piece got published
Just heard about and read the piece in the CMAJ titled "Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion". The writer has a right to his opinion and must have psychosocial reasons for his perspective but what is really surprising is that CMAJ would publish it. This piece has no scientific or medical value. It is simply an opinion piece that has inflammatory content. CMAJ Editorial Board needs to explain why they would publish a piece like this.
Competing Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
It is unfortunate to see the Canadian Medical Association publish an article from someone who is clearly misinformed about the hijab, it's
intent, and what it represents.The author claims to respect women who wear the hijab, yet at the same time claims that the hijab is an instrument of oppression. Why any respectable journal would publish an article that contradicts itself in the very statement it tries to assert is baffling.
I respectfully ask the author to better research the reasons why women truly wear the hijab. As a Muslim woman, raised in Canada, I choose to wear hijab as an affirmation of my faith and as a respect to myself. The oppression that the author speaks of is not tied to Islam, rather it is a result of extreme patriarchal attitudes that pervert the teachings of Islam and twist it to fit their own agendas.
Had the author done their due diligence and thoroughly researched the purpose of the hijab and what it represents with the respect the subject deserves, it would not have led the author to make such an erroneous conclusion.
I respectfully ask the author to take a step back, reflect, and evaluate what is feeding their bias against the hijab. Is this from personal experience? Is this from first-hand accounts from patients claiming to be oppressed by the hijab? Is this from peers claiming to be oppressed by the hijab? I sense, from reading your article, that these biases are being fed from misinformed sources that...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for Discussion, exchange of opinion and criticism should be promoted not banned.Discussion, exchange of opinion and criticism should be promoted not banned.
Doctor Emil has expressed a valid point of view which deserves to be published. Of course, I will also be interested in reading from others.
Freedom of expression is fundamental even if it sometimes hurts.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Islamophobic articleRE: Islamophobic article
My daughter looks like the girl in the cover. She choose to wear hijab. This article is disheartening and spreads misinformation. I wonder what will the girl in the cover feel if she reads this article?
Competing Interests: I am a muslim who wear hijab. - Page navigation anchor for RE:Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE:Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
I was quite surprise this afternoon as I finished up clinic. My wife was up in arms about a CMAJ article? She is not even a physician and was outraged line with a letter written in the Dec issue? I wouldn't have even got to reading this issue until the middle of next year as I catch up on the rest of the journals I try to read! After reading the the letter by Sherif Emil I was quite upset myself at the content of the letter and more importantly at the CMAJ.
Show More
To the acting Editor of the CMAJ, you know our mantra is "First do no harm?" In the context of Bill 21, the targeted mosque shooting in Montreal, the horrific mowing down of Muslims in London, Ontario, and the extreme in Islamaphobia rising in Canada, why on earth would you print this opinion piece that has nothing to with medicine, nothing to do with the article itself and is deeply flawed on so many levels. Your a journal that has national reach and I would implore you to be more prudent in the future. This letter you have printed has caused much harm.
Now lets get to the letter. I'm writing in the context of being born in Canada, raised as a Muslim, having a wife that put on the Hijab much later life and having three beautiful daughter who will make there choice on what they want to do with the hijab when the get older. I first must say I loved that picture on the cover of November issue. Thank you CMAJ for doing that. This is Canada, a multicultural mix all people and faith,...Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Open Access Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion Sherif Emil CMAJ December 20, 2021 193 (50) E1923; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.8074
- Page navigation anchor for Islamophobia and Anti-Muslim discrimination alive in Medicine and in the CMAJIslamophobia and Anti-Muslim discrimination alive in Medicine and in the CMAJ
As physicians who choose to wear hijab, we are deeply offended by this CMAJ article perpetuating anti-Muslim discrimination.
Normalizing anti-Muslim discourse in Canadian politics (Bill 21) leads to anti-Muslim violence, targeted killing (London Ontario murders and Quebec mosque terror attack) and increased Islamophobia. The impact in medicine is no less significant as is evident from U of T’s Voice of the Residents survey indicating a high level of anti-Muslim discrimination within Medicine.
We are horrified and fearful to have physician colleagues fueling deadly stereotypes about their Muslim patients and Muslim colleagues. Equating a hijab with a symbol of oppression of child abuse is in itself oppressive and discriminatory.
How can medical education teach EDI when the disease is so embedded in the system that targeted acts of religious discrimination are openly published in our academic medical journals?
We feel deeply for individuals who experience abuse in religious contexts, this occurs in many religions and is truly horrific. However, this experience does not allow for the stereotyping and demonization an entire faith or it’s practices, yet for some reason this continues to be acceptable for Islam.
In the last few days many of us have been asked if Muslim’s force their 4 year olds to wear hijab thanks to this article. The narrative about the hijab continues to be led by horrific media representation or by extremists, and not by...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Fadus MC, Ginsburg KR, Sobowale K, et al. Unconscious Bias and the Diagnosis of Disruptive Behavior Disorders and ADHD in African American and Hispanic Youth. Acad Psychiatry. 2020;44(1):95-102. doi:10.1007/s40596-019-01127-6
- Goodman A, Fleming K, Markwick N, et al. "They treated me like crap and I know it was because I was Native": The healthcare experiences of Aboriginal peoples living in Vancouver's inner city [published correction appears in Soc Sci Med. 2017 Jul;184:187].
- Page navigation anchor for RE: recent bias publicationRE: recent bias publication
As a visible hijab wearing Canadian woman who studied in Canada, this article was very hurtful to me and my beliefs. How can you allow to publish this?
Please stop with the hate that you are spreading, it is very damaging to our society and to our future generations.Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: disturbing publicationRE: disturbing publication
To whom it may concern,
As a Canadian woman graduate of the University of Toronto I was disgusted to see CMAJ include such a racist view in their publication. You’re taking the beautiful hijab a symbol for so many and giving it a negative view. What is the main objective here? Is it to create more hate towards these girls who choose to wear it? Why can’t everyone just accept people the way they are instead of creating hate towards an already marginalized group that faces struggles due to publications like this. Girls in hijab can do anything any other girls do. We are athletes, we are doctors with PhDs, pharmacists, architects, engineers, teachers, why don’t you highlight those things?! As a mother of a girl myself when my daughter came to me wanting to wear the hijab I supported her and instilled in her that she can do anything anyone else can do and even better. Her belief in her self will lead her to conquer whatever she dreams of to put more good into this world. It is very sad that you allow someone with such limited views publish something like this in your journal to spread more hate towards these girls. Shame on you and what you are allowing in Canada nonetheless, where such a large population of muslims live. We will not be silent on this matter!Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.RE: Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
The CMJ S editorial board need to look and examine their motivation for publishing this article. Have we learnt nothing from the recent revelations of what went on in the residential school. Islamaphobia has to stop, before this goes any further,and the medical fraternity, should be at the forefront.I am a practicing physician and have proudly been wearing my hijab for the last 31 years to work. My choice!!
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: don’t use misogynistic racist stereotypes for generalization of a populationRE: don’t use misogynistic racist stereotypes for generalization of a population
The letter above is a highly racist generalist view held for years against all Muslim women. Like all human beings Muslim women come in all demographics and mental capabilities. Hijab wearing is a very minor part of our overall being. Do not define our family situations, our beliefs, our practices and our thoughts based on your personal prejudices against a certain country you came from. Please let us decide how we want to dress and what religion we want to practice. We don’t want a provincial or state law to allow us to wear our hijabs or not. We as Canadian Muslim physicians treat men and women alike without religious prejudice. We deserve the same.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE:Degrading a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE:Degrading a symbol of diversity and inclusion
Wearing a hijab is personal choice. CMAJ should be ashamed on publishing an article that touches on sensitive religious feelings. It's deplorable that Islam is judged on such personal preferences which people like Sherif Emil blow out of proportion. CMAJ should submit an apology and desist from publishing on such controversial topics in the future.
Competing Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: islamophobiaRE: islamophobia
I’m saddened by the published material that is inaccurate and reflects significant injustice
Competing Interests: Generalization in unacceptable wayReferences
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: An utterly Islamophobic piece written by someone who seems to see Hijabi women (my daughters) as a threat. SHAME !RE: An utterly Islamophobic piece written by someone who seems to see Hijabi women (my daughters) as a threat. SHAME !
What an utter Islamophobic piece I am shocked even got through the editors !
There needs to be :
1. Full retraction
2. Formal apology for not doing your due diligence before publication and for promoting hate speech at a time when Muslims AND women have been the target of fatal violence (assuming it was a miss step).
3. All CMAJ board members take sensitivity training and it’s announced that they will in the CMAJ
4. Next issue cover features Hijabi women in healthcare !Dr. Tariq Hassan
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: very ignorant articleRE: very ignorant article
Please stop spreading hatred in your article. True oppression is when someone calls your religion a terrorism religion and your article is clearly encouraging that. Please reach out to the Muslim community and specifically females and ask their view before enforcing yours.
Competing Interests: I do not concurrent with the author’s viewReferences
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Religious generalizationsRE: Religious generalizations
I am deeply embarrassed that the CMAJ would publish such generalizations and stereotypes about hijabi without reflection on how islamophobic this content is. While any religious symbol can be experienced as oppressive by some, I cannot imagine something being published that paints a Christian symbol such as the cross as a universal symbol of oppression despite the fact that many women and young girls are also shamed into modesty in its name, limited in their educational and professional choices and sexually exploited. Religious extremism exists in many faiths but our society seems able to appreciate that the views of some fundamentalists do not represent all believers in regards to faith traditions other than Islam. I hope that the editors will solicit wider feedback and reflect on whether they would publish such stereotypes about others faiths moving forward to help make future journal content congruent with the CMA’s own commitment to equity and diversity in medicine.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
Dear CMAJ
I am really saddened and upset to see CMAJ publish this article. We must remember that only this year was a Muslim family of four (Hijab wearing) killed in London, Ontario. This type of article gives credence and empowers Islamophobes to commit hate crimes against Muslims. Choosing to wear a Hijab is a personal choice for women as a sign of submitting to the will of God and pleasing Him. We practice our religion to ultimately to please God and encourage our children to do the same. The Hijab is not some kind of 'ownership' to the father/husband to which it is commonly misconstrued. In fact, every religion has the same goal and objective for religious practices/worship.
Dr Sherif Emil has clearly been influenced by his upbringing living in Egypt as a Christian, where he has explained he was mistreated, he resents the word 'Islamophobia' and did not like that in the proposed clause: '“condemn all forms of systemic racism, religious intolerance, and discrimination of Muslims, Jews, Christians, Sikhs, Hindus, and other religious communities”...Muslims was placed first. see speech here: https://openparliament.ca/committees/canadian-heritage/42-1/77/dr-sherif... This speech clearly demonstrates his involvement in political activism and anti-Muslim rhetoric. Further:
"Ladies and gentlemen, we are living in an age when terro...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Instrument of IdentityRE: Instrument of Identity
It's unfortunate that the author being assumingly educated, chose to conventionalize the Hijab. In today's world and age there is no room for stereotyping. We can no longer choose skin colour, race, caste, sexual and religious identities to marginalize and discriminate. Hijab like any other material object, be it a cross around the neck, a rainbow wrist band, turban or kippah, is an individuals choice to represent their identity. No matter what the statistics, we can not and must not assume that most black men are criminals, hijabans are oppressed, and so on. This form of prejudiced behaviour will only lead to further marginalisation and exclusion of certain communities. Let's not try brew more hate than we can handle. Let's try learn, understand and love together.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for CMAJ - Stop the Violence towards Muslim Female Physicians & Healthcare WorkersCMAJ - Stop the Violence towards Muslim Female Physicians & Healthcare Workers
I am shocked, infuriated, disconcerted, and deeply troubled that the CMAJ chose to publish Sherif Emil’s anti-Muslim article that further perpetuates ongoing stereotypes of Muslim women in medicine and healthcare. His article paints Muslim academic women as oppressed because they choose to wear the hijab. This is by far the most misogynistic and Islamophobic piece of literature that I have read in a medical journal recently. His writing demonstrates how mainstream islamophobia is within medicine that such an article can go through and be published without any hesitation by one of the top medical journals in Canada. His words further the ongoing violence towards the minds and bodies of Muslim female healthcare professionals. As a proud hijab wearing Muslim staff Endocrinologist, I strongly request that the CMAJ imminently remove this horrendous publication, provide an apology to the Muslim physicians and healthcare professionals, and investigate how such racist literature can get published within their journal with such ease. Furthermore, I am deeply troubled that an individual with a track record of Islamophobic literature on the internet can be providing care to Muslim patients.
Dr. Sarah Khan MD FRCPC
Staff Endocrinologist at Credit Valley Hospital & the Bone Research ClinicCompeting Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for Racist CMAJ publicationRacist CMAJ publication
This needs to be retracted ASAP and a letter of apology from the author and the CMAJ must follow to all Muslims. Editor should consider resigning as this is shameful and disgraceful to this Canadian journal. I have lost all trust in this journal and this doctor. How will his Muslim patients ever trust him?
Why is a non-muslim male talking about what women can and can't wear again?Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
To the Editor/Editorial Board CMAJ.
Undoubtedly this was not the response you anticipated. I would hope you do not hide behind the veil of freedom of speech with this article/issue. While the author is entitled to his opinion, your respected scholarly journal has crossed beyond its mandate. Would an article of this nature been permitted if it made personal biases riwards other groups? If for example someone wrote the “kippa or cross” were instruments of hate and brutality? One can argue a Palestinian would see the “kippa” as such. I’m certain if you ask our first nation’s people their opinion of the cross and church, you would illicit a similar response. My point is your journal would never publish something like this if it wasn’t towards Muslims. This article does nothing to dispel Islamophibic tropes, it only enhances them and provides false justification for them.
Your journal at the very least owes the Muslim community an apology and your editorial board should under take some training specific to Islamophobia. Anything less, you fall short in an honored profession that through its very oath ascribes neutrality and upholding what is right.Sincerely
Imran SyedCompeting Interests: See above. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Islamophobia has to be unrooted among physiciansRE: Islamophobia has to be unrooted among physicians
I can’t believe that an educated person is this much under-educated about the use and meaning of hijab to Muslim women. The remarks themselves are oppressive to whomever knew what hijab is.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Hate speach is the ultimate instrument of oppressionRE: Hate speach is the ultimate instrument of oppression
I wear the hijab and it is disgusting to read such an article. I can not believe I still have to say this in 2021, my hijab is my choice. No one forced me to wear it. It is not about sexualization as this article implies. It is about me and my identity and what I believe in. What is always interesting about such articles is that they victimize and criminalize hijabis at the same time. Pure hate speach! Shame on you CMAJ for publishing this!
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: The credibility of CMAJ is questionable!RE: The credibility of CMAJ is questionable!
I know medical journals in other countries to be a testament to fact and well researched laws. Not pulp fiction, not radically biased opinions, not falsification of the truth and certainly not a journal that opines on gravely misrepresented facts.
After reading this incredibly exaggerated then generalised letter on a religious belief system (the hijab), I now distrust the CMAJ and its credibility. How can a medical journal be allowed to publish such a letter without any basis of truth or reasoning. It's pathetic and the only purpose it serves is to create differences and disunity in our Canadian society and our peace loving mentality.
I demand the CMAJ retract this letter, give an unconditional public apology and severely reprimand not only the author, but also the management team that approved and published this horrendous article.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: CMAJ Islamophobic commentsRE: CMAJ Islamophobic comments
The article contains incredibly Islamophobic comments. It is irresponsible and divisive to publish and fuel these continued negative stereotypes.
Competing Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: read the roomRE: read the room
Islamophobia is alive and well within Canadian communities and this article does nothing but continue to fuel it and reinforce it. I do not wear a hijab myself and I find this article extremely hurtful. You need to take it down immediately, an apology is not enough. Whoever is responsible for this decision has to be “de radicalised” and disciplined accordingly.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- N6E 1P1
- Page navigation anchor for RE: proud hijabi frontline worker hereRE: proud hijabi frontline worker here
Hello Dr. Sherif Emil
I am an infectious disease Physician Assistant and I proudly wore my hijab when I saw covid patients during my pregnancy. I thought in medicine we don’t judge our colleagues or anyone on their religion, sexuality and race. Yet you published a whole bigoted article commenting on a piece of clothing many women choose to wear.For a prestigious medical journal to publish such islamaphobic content is shocking. I can’t believe this passed the editorial filter and this article must be retracted.
Did you ask that child in the picture if she’s oppressed? Do you not wonder that she may be feeling horrified that having a mere picture taken of her reading with a classmate has lead to a discussion of her body, her rights, her clothing attire and provoked trauma to women who were forced to wear hijab?
I guess my four year old who looks up to me and tries on the hijab to be like me has lost the chance of ever representing a diverse community or being published in the media.Please don’t tell us women what we should / shouldn’t wear. And keep your stereotypes away from the academic community.
I am wondering if your biases and bigotry come in the way of treating Muslim hijab wearing Pediatric
patients if you are capable of writing such poorly researched, shallow content. FYI, I drive, bike, swim, play recreational sports.To all the Muslim female physicians who have undergone trauma in their childhood regarding...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for Discriminatory and disrespectfulDiscriminatory and disrespectful
As a hijabi Canadian physician, felt extremely offended and betrayed by my own professional community. Pls stop spreading hate messages.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
The author has clearly contradicted himself (respects women choice to wear hijab yet we should alienate them by not allowing hijabi pics). CMAJ, where is the science in this article exactly?
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: CMAJ promoting hateful contentRE: CMAJ promoting hateful content
You say you are “sorry for the harm caused by the publication of a letter in this week's issue, suggesting that the hijab is an instrument of oppression of Muslim women.”
What concrete actions are you going to undertake to correct this wrong?
Here are a few suggestions(collated by friends and colleagues):
1. Full retraction
2. Formal apology for not doing your due diligence before publication and for promoting hate speech at a time when Muslims AND women have been the target of fatal violence (assuming it was a miss step).
3. All CMAJ board members take sensitivity training and it’s announced that they will in the CMAJ
4. Next issue cover features Hijabi women in healthcare!Anything less than this will not be acceptable . Promoting hatred is never correct, it’s never “free speech” it’s never journalistic integrity, it never makes you brave or smart, and it’s certainly not the high standards we have come to expect of the Canadian Medical Association Journal.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Discriminatory articleRE: Discriminatory article
I am very disappointed to see the recent opinion piece by Dr. Emil published in the latest edition of the CMAJ. While the author is entitled to his opinion (however misinformed), this kind of divisive and frankly racist text does not have a place in one of our country’s most esteemed medical journals. It is extremely concerning this kind of rhetoric was allowed to be published. I cannot imagine the editors would have published a similar piece about another faith’s religious practices. The author’s personal experiences cannot be reflective of a faith of 1.8 billion people. His language is inflammatory and misinformed at best. Shame on CMAJ for publishing it.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Islamaphobia in Canadian MedicineRE: Islamaphobia in Canadian Medicine
This is a shameful post that not only consists of islamaphobic and racist content, but also lacks any sort of scientific backing, or any sort of quality that should make it published to CMAJ. I mean citing a tweet??? Blatantly calling Hijab “a symbol of oppression”?? This sounds like stuff you find in right wing propaganda websites. This publication should be retracted immediately. All it serves is to hurt the Muslim community at large, especially stabbing all the hijabi healthcare workers in the back after their sacrifices during the covid pandemic. And this also gives islamaphobes a “reputable” resource to further their propaganda which can lead to very serious consequences and even death, like the unfortunate London ON attack on a Muslim family. How this got through to publication is mind boggling, considering how much CMAJ prides itself on being a peer reviewed journal publishing the highest quality medical research articles. This isn’t in CMAJ’s area of expertise and they have no bussiness posting about it. And if they do, the least they should do is require a female hijabi physician also be at the writing table, not a non-Muslim male, and also cite scholarly Islamic works not a tweet by some lady who is against hijabs. Very disappointed that this is still up, please retract it.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: disturbingRE: disturbing
I expect all articles in the CMAJ to be thoroughly researched, and free of bias, not to mention racism. The fact that this article was even published speaks to the validity, authenticity, reputability, and whatever else you want to call it, of CMA itself. So utterly disgraceful. I hope Muslim doctors and health workers boycott this org.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Essentializing narratives are problematicRE: Essentializing narratives are problematic
This letter in response to the image of a hijab-wearing child is problematic because it essentializes this child and others like her...All children deserve representation in our media images. Representation matters!
The discussion of the hijab is one that will continue and there are better places for this than the CMAJ.
However, the negative health consequences of islamophobia and other forms of marginalization experienced by many Muslim communities in Canada because of essentializing narratives like the one in this letter can and should be discussed further in the CMAJ.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: real discriminationRE: real discrimination
I am shocked that this is he thinking of a physician who treats Children, shocked more by CMAJ to allow this discriminatory letter to be published.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Hijab, niqab, and face mask in the Covid pandemicRE: Hijab, niqab, and face mask in the Covid pandemic
It is disappointing to see this letter published in CMAJ. It criticizes the publication of a picture of two young girls, one wearing a head cover. I thought the picture is cute and promotes diversity which we Canadians are proud of. The author has his own biases against hijab (head cover) and niqab (face mask). However, when the whole world is observing social distancing and wearing face mask, this letter is misplaced and unwanted.
Perhaps, instead this Pediatrician may consider helping out in mass Covid vaccination clinics as very young children are getting immunized.Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: DiscriminationRE: Discrimination
As a long time reader of the CMAJ, I was upset that this article was published as it fans the flames of Islamophobia.
It is divisive and contributes little or no value to medicine as we practice it in Canada.
I look forward to a redaction and an apology.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: ShamefulRE: Shameful
I am appalled by the publication of this in Canada's leading medical journal that perpetuates anti-Muslim discrimination and Islamophobia, equating wearing of the Hijab with child abuse and extremism. Shame on publishing such an hateful article.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: please take downRE: please take down
Articles like this are the reason why muslim women will continue to be oppressed. Another male opinion about and what they should and should not do. I dont see a better image to stand for diversity and inclusion that a women in her hijab. Dr Emil, get used to it because its not going anywhere anytime soon. I am in utter disbelief that something so biased gets published in a medical journal. Pure islamophobia
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- L6M 0R8
- Page navigation anchor for RE: possibly well intentioned but biased and misinformed.RE: possibly well intentioned but biased and misinformed.
If hijab is a symbol of oppression, then the cross can also be seen as a symbol of oppression to all those native Americans who were forced to evangelize in resedential schools. What a religious symbol means and how some people choose to abuse it are completely different things. Islam doesn't require or ask of prepubescent girls to wear hijab. I personally wear hijab by choice as an act of worship and don't understand why media chooses to portray 5 year olds in hijab. However at the same time understand what it is you are looking at or judging. Some young girls will wear the hijab at home or the mosque because they are learning to pray for example and take it off afterwards. Some like to wear it during ramadan, and others might literally be paying around with their mothers scarf the same way a young girl plays with her mom's heels or lipstick. Islam does not teach young girls that they are sexual objects quite the opposite actually. So before you go confusing religion, culture, and lack of education please do some more research or at least have someone with some level of knowledge review these articles before publishing. I personally find hijab very liberating and similar to any other act of worship it's meant to be a personal choice. Under Islamic law no one is supposed to compel any person to practice a particular religion or compel them to worship at all. It is supposed to be a relationship between the person and god alone.
Now the fact that...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- L6L 0C5
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Article - "Open Access Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion"RE: Article - "Open Access Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion"
In our time where equity, diversity and inclusion is an area rapidly emerging to combat the exposed facets of discrimination across different organizational levels, I believe we can all agree that many if not all of us play a role in being open-minded and being humble with our approach to life-long learning as we refute prejudice and assumptions to be open to exploring the views and beliefs of others. Avoiding prejudice and assumptions, and not jumping to generalizations are some of the core principles every physician was supposedly tested on when entering medical school (e.g. Casper test).
The author of this article does highlight an important point - as a Muslim, I can attest that it is correct that there is a proportion of Muslim women around the world that are forced (or feel forced) against their will to abide by certain practices.
However, the large issue and fallacy here is the generalization made that the hijab, burka, and niqab, as components of an individual's faith, are a representation of oppression.
To make it brief and clear, we have to make the distinction between culture and faith.It is the human-based cultural practices/views that are flawed and oppress women.
Show More
And based on the fact that the vast MAJORITY of Muslim women attest THEMSELVES that they are empowered with the choice and freedom to wear a hijab/niqab/burka, we can likely say that it is not justified to target a religion's teachings itself rather than an...Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Islamophobic letter published in CMAJRE: Islamophobic letter published in CMAJ
I am writing to say how absolutely appalled and deeply hurt I was to read the recently published letter in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) by Dr. Sherif Emil.
The title endorsed that hijab is a tool of oppression. You chose to give platform to islamophobic assumptions and thus to alienate a significant proportion of healthcare workers across the country who have served their communities tirelessly (especially in the midst of a pandemic). You chose to publish a letter filled with islamophobia and division at a time that CMAJ should have been fostering unity.
I am a hijab wearing physician and made the decision to wear the hijab as an act of devotion to God. Many faith groups observe similar traditions without having to face accusations of oppression and child rape. In Canada, I have a right to practice my faith, and my muslim patients and my family have a right to access healthcare in a way that does not invoke judgment about their beliefs. It is very concerning that CMAJ would engage in the dehumanisation of an entire diverse faith group of 1.8 billion people by publishing this letter. We can advocate for and support people who were traumatised by misuse of (any) religion during their upbringing without this sort of dangerous rhetoric.
The characterisation by the author of the young girl in the picture, as typically one who would be "banned from riding a bike , swimming or participating in other activities.." was bizarre an...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil CMAJ December 20, 2021 193 (50) E1923; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.80742
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Sherif Emil LetterRE: Sherif Emil Letter
I am confused and disappointed why CMAJ would choose to print Sherif Emil's article about his opinion on hijab.
How does this letter filled with hateful and Islamophobic comments impact quality patient care and best practices in medicine?
That being a rhetorical question, and I do hope CMAJ will do the
right thing to apologize for choosing to print this article, and retract it so Emil's hate filled letter won't be shared any further.Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193RE: Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193
I have two thoughts regarding this article by Sherif Emil.
The first is with respect to the CMAJ - how does publishing an opinion piece that looks like it belongs in the Toronto Sun furthering the understanding of medical practice or issues facing Canadians? I’ll help you answer that question - it does not. It appears that the CMAJ is trying to illicit fame and website clicks by allowing such comments to be published.
The second thought I have is related to some of the comments and language used by Sherif Emil in his opinion piece. As a paediatric surgeon, your job is not to provide your personal opinion on the cultural or religious practices of other Canadians. Your job, sir, is to “do no harm.” This is the principle you should be upholding as opposed to using your position of authority to inject biased and, quite frankly, baseless opinions in the CMAJ.
What is interesting is that Sherif says he has patients who wear the hijab and tries to convince readers that he respects women. Well, if you truly believe that then you should not be criticizing the religious practices of Muslim women.
For you to equate the hijab with the Taliban, women sold into marriage, and child abuse is the most far fetched and extreme correlation made by someone who should know better. You use outliers to generalize the entire Muslim population where women both young and old wear the hijab.
While it is true that some women globally do face oppression, it is not...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for What a load of BSWhat a load of BS
Seriously? If this is the islamophobic bs that I have to deal with in 21st century Canada, I don’t know where to go. The author may find it hard to believe, but a lot of women actually wear the hijab out of their own free will. Because they want to, NOT because someone forces them to. And they manage to ride bikes, climb trees, perform on stage, and kick ass in their chosen professions while wearing one. Please stop with your uninformed, ignorant views. You should be embarrassed. And CMAJ should be ashamed they published something like this on their platform.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Full of Hate Speech and IslamophobiaRE: Full of Hate Speech and Islamophobia
This article is full of hate speech and Islamophobia. Child trauma is one thing and painting an entire society with the same brush is another thing. Many individuals across the globe experience child trauma and for many different reasons. This does not make it acceptable for a hater and a man to speak on behalf of millions of women who choose to wear hijab. What an oxymoron!
Competing Interests: Oncology Palliative Care DialysisReferences
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Islamophobic nonsenseRE: Islamophobic nonsense
It is unthinkable that such a reputable journal as CMAJ would allow this hateful and ignorant letter to be published. I am very concerned that it will serve to perpetuate dangerous stereotypes against Muslims.
This letter needs to be retracted immediately and the CMAJ should issue an apology.Competing Interests: None declared.References
- L6H 0C8
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Islamophobia is real and alive- even in medicineRE: Islamophobia is real and alive- even in medicine
While millions of hijab wearing healthcare professionals around the world, and in Canada, are battling COVID-19 on the frontlines this author engages in a blistering attack against their faith. The author relies on simplistic and antiquated Islamophobic tropes to justify his positions. Furthermore, he relies on his own personal experiences, anecdotal experiences, and references fanatical groups to lampoon of faith of 1.8 billion people. All the while he conveniently ignores the oppression in his backyard, Quebec and Bill C-21, and the recent firing of a teacher from a public school board in Quebec for simply wearing a hijab to work; and the recent terrorist killing of a Muslim family in London, ON due to the rise in Islamophobia.
What is even more concerning is that this journal, the CMAJ, provided a platform for an individual to air their own political and personal grievances against an ideology well outside the mandate for a medical journal. Finally, the most troubling fact is the author is in an Academic Medical Education position where he provides oversight and training to Muslim trainees. How can one be certain that the author is able to provide credible and fair assessments to his trainees? How can one be certain that the author provide fair and equitable medical treatment to Muslim hijab wearing patients?
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
It is frustrating to read in the CMAJ such a poorly-presented and Islamophobic opinion piece by a Canadian medical professional who oversees students and residents.
Dr. Emil starts his letter by referencing the image of a young girl in Muslim head-cover (i.e. hijab) and he quotes an ex-Muslim anti-hijab activist who was raised in an Al-Qaeda household as well as an anonymous Muslim surgical trainee, both apparently triggered by this image due to having been raised in extremist societies. These women’s negative experiences with hijab are truly unfortunate and they are entitled to their opinions and reactions. If the point was left at the images of young children in hijab as being problematic, there may be room for a respectful discussion to be had. After all, hijab on very young girls is NOT a common occurrence in most Muslim families.
However, Dr Emil’s letter quickly devolves into tropes about hijab generally being “an instrument of oppression”, fostering “institutionalized child rape”, and being a tool for “child abuse”, tropes that have long permeated anti-Islam bigoted talking points.
Hijab as a subject is deeply divisive because it involves women’s bodies and is a conspicuous marker of religion. In every society, there are those who try to control women’s bodies and sexuality. However, it seems quite disingenuous to claim that hijab itself is the source of the problem. While there are many women in the world who are pressured to wear the...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
It is incredibly disappointing to see CMAJ endorsing a view that promotes Islamophobia. Many many women around the world proudly adorn their hijabs. Yes its unfortunate that some nations, for political reasons, have oppressed women and that should be shamed but dont make a beautiful garment the source of your hate. Shame on you for undermining the million of empowered women who have made a conscious (and proud) decision to wear the hijab. I am absolutely disgusted that even 2021 we are having to explain to people like camj why this is Islamophobic and will not be tolerated
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Dangerous rhetoric and irresponsible postingRE: Dangerous rhetoric and irresponsible posting
The logical fallacies in this “article” almost make this not worth the energy to respond to. However, the danger of this rhetoric is too great to ignore. Erasure of an entire subset of people who legitimately believe in the sanctity of the Hijab is not a solution to addressing the oppression that a subset of Muslims face. It’s laughable that CMAJ would think that a non-Muslim man is the authority on a Muslim woman’s experience.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Articles like this is the reason why Muslim women are oppressed by societyRE: Articles like this is the reason why Muslim women are oppressed by society
This letter has no place in a reputable journal such as CMAJ. It is divisive and completely misrepresenting the hijab and quoting views from one woman who had a bad experience. What about the millions who are happily wearing a hijab on their own accord? I am a hijabi and I know numerous hijabi women. All of us wear the hijab out of choice and not because it was forced on us.
As a hijabi Muslim woman, I took pride in being in a country that allowed us the freedom to choose what we wore, whether it be a hijab or not. But recently, Islamophobic sentiments have led to the rise of oppression of women. We have all seen what happens when far-right politicians take those freedoms away. You have women being forced out of work because they choose to wear a hijab. This is not the view that CMAJ should be promoting. To think, a girl dressing up in her religious clothing for a picture could be so offensive to somebody, is abhorrent. How dare you put your insecurities and beliefs above the rights of that child? She can dress as she wishes. The author of this letter and the woman he quoted stereotyped women or children wearing hijabs as coming from radical Islamic household. This is a grossly obnoxious characterization. They have clearly come from a deranged family background for which I feel sorry for them, but it does not represent the majority of Muslim households where hijabs are worn.
I come from a liberal family with moderately religious parents. My mother wears a h...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
Just writing this response to voice my opinion on the article that was newly released on CMAJ. As a hijabi women, I can say that we are NOT oppressed! The fact that a highly educated NON-MUSLIM doctor can write and publish such article is disgusting.
I was not forced to wear it and have not had any traumatizing experiences while wearing it. In fact, I've had nothing but good experiences. I've played and participated in sport teams my whole childhood and adulthood. I've travelled to many countries and have landed multiple great opportunities because of my hijab.
The fact that people with so much privilege get to publish such articles and have their opinions voiced in times where racism is at an all-time high is sad. You make our lives that much harder. Rather than spreading love, you spread hate and cause so much hurt to the Muslim community.
I am born and raised in Canada and today I am ashamed to be Canadian. Canada should be about diversity and inclusion and you're doing the complete opposite of that. Shame on you.
Competing Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Woefully unprofessional. This is opinion and discreditable rhetoric.RE: Woefully unprofessional. This is opinion and discreditable rhetoric.
As Muslim Canadian, and convert to religion I say this article is not worth anything and of no value to the discourse on sociological understandings of religious groups and minorities. The author Sherif Emil, may very we be writing from the rhetorical stance of being a racialized person who comes from a Muslim majority country, however, his article cites poor sources that are biased and only serve his opinion. Critique of Islam and its practices is not the issue here, is how it is done. There is no rigor or value to this offering from Dr. Emil. A publication like CMAJ that I know prides itself on academic and journalistic values must do better when having these kinds of articles written by your contributors. If it is an opinion please make it plainly obvious it is an opinion piece.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for CMAJ Standards, Professionalism, and Inaccuracies with respect to the HijabCMAJ Standards, Professionalism, and Inaccuracies with respect to the Hijab
The idea that Dr. Emil's opinion made it through CMAJ editorial board is rather shocking despite the editor's apology, especially when one of his references is from a Twitter activist who bases her ideas on hijab without the proper academic rigor/merit. Can any twitter activist now be sourced as a legitimate and vetted source? The problem here is that two wrongs do not make a right.
It would be one thing to have a few hijab and non hijab donning female Muslims, and/or a scholar in a forum discuss this topic, but Dr. Emil being Coptic possesses no primary or secondary specialty in the complex topic of Hijab.
He himself says he stumbled across this article based on a little girl wearing hijab.
Going through CMAJ mission statements:
"As a founding member of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), we seek to exemplify the highest ethical and operational standards in medical journal publication."Based on the aforementioned article, I cannot get myself to stand behind that last statement. As physicians we expect THE highest ethical standards, and that our contributors, authors, and journals study the proper due diligence in terms of various culture practices.
I find it rather astonishing that as a successful surgeon, during the turmoil of systemic racism that we constantly endure as American/Canadian Muslims, Dr Emil denies that systemic racism exists:
""Dr. Sherif Emil, ped...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- CHPC, Evidence, 1 st Session, 42nd Parliament, 16 October 2017, 1550 (Emil) -TAKING ACTION AGAINST SYSTEMIC RACISM AND RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION INCLUDING ISLAMOPHOBIA Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage Hon. Hedy Fry, Chair. 2018.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
Early Monday morning, I was excited to have received an email from CMAJ confirming publication of my case report with minor edits.
Later that same day, I received a notification that CMAJ had published a piece entitled “Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion.” I could not believe that the editorial team at CMAJ would even consider associating itself with this xenophobic article. As a hijabi neurology resident, I cannot comprehend how it is appropriate for a male to insist I am being oppressed based off of a sample size of two women and Taliban injustices. While my heart goes out to the women cited in the article and the countless victims of extremist fanatics, there is nothing that can justify the language this author has used to denigrate and insult the identity of countless hijabi physicians.
And let me reiterate: I do consider this article as a direct attack on my own identity and freedom to dress how I choose. Words truly have consequences. The author claims that women wearing hijab are “typically also banned from riding a bike, swimming or participating in other activities.” While I don’t understand how a hijab is a hindrance for these activities, I do know of a place where a hijabi woman cannot pursue a teaching career due to the way she has chosen to dress. Right here in Quebec (where the author is based), Fatameh Anvari cannot pursue her passion due to Bill 21.
As for Dr. Emil, I would never feel comfort...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: This perspective represents part of the problem rather than a solutionRE: This perspective represents part of the problem rather than a solution
While the article is I'm sure well intended, it in fact uncovers a harmful and counter-productive view of women who wear Hijab. The fallacies in the author's argument (elucidated below) would be entertained if it was a matter of academic debate, but unfortunately, this type of view has serious real world consequences. It only adds to the alienization of women who wear the Hijab and I would argue adds to the vulnerability of such women in the face of psychological, physical and political aggression. It would be helpful if the author can clarify his conclusion/argument and his premise to support this conclusion. He seems to object to the image of a young girl in a Hijab based on the premise that Hijab is sometimes used by people who subjugate Muslim women and girls AND that showing an image of a young girl wearing a Hijab supports such oppression. The premise of his argument does not logically lend itself to his conclusion. Yes - far too many Muslim women are oppressed, and yes, in far too many instances, particular clothing and restriction of certain activities is forced upon them in an oppressive way. Oppressive people will oppress others with whatever tool they find in their hands - whether it be money, weapons, language, or religion. It is beguiling as to how one can conclude that Hijab is inherently wrong such that any image of a girl or woman wearing Hijab evokes the sentiment that they are oppressed. I really hope the author can clarify how he reaches this c...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Oppression and Yasmine MohammedRE: Oppression and Yasmine Mohammed
This article is not appropriate to be published in a Canadian medical journal. My hijab is not an instrument of oppression. I choose to wear it.
Aside from being entirely unrelated to medical practice your article is spreading dangerous stereotypes that encourage the othering and persecution of Muslim families in Canada. Did you forget the family targeted and killed for their faith in London, ON? This is where oppression exists in Canada and you are a part of it.
Yasmine Mohammed, who you claim "has championed equality for Muslim women" has also equated Islam to Nazism (Tweet 18 August 2017); told Justin Trudeau to "Shut the f up" on 16 December 2021 in response to a tweet asking Canadians to limit travel during Omicron; and finally following the London killings I mentioned earlier she tweeted that "ppl are making unfair statements like 'Canada is unsafe for Muslims' and 'Canadians are bigots. Pretty disheartening." Presumably this is more upsetting for her than the Muslim family murdered for their faith. This woman is extremely Islamophobic, and stands against Canadian medical advice during this pandemic. Why on earth is she being given a platform to spread her bile in your journal?
This article should be retracted immediately and an apology given to the Muslim community.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: incredibly Islamophobic, and unsurprisingly a MAN discussing how women dress…..RE: incredibly Islamophobic, and unsurprisingly a MAN discussing how women dress…..
As someone who wears Hijab and has found it to be one of the most liberating feminist decisions I have ever made I am deeply saddened to find this published in the CMAJ no less. This feeds into the very rhetoric that has fuelled recent targeted terror attacks in recent years. Such broad assumptions made about families and people who choose this way of life. The girls in my community ride bikes, play hockey, horseback ride and are not treated as a sexual symbol. There are countless ways to oppress people. Do you see anyone campaigning against marriage? Procreation? Also used as a tool of oppression in many different communities …
2021 and we are still seeing MEN speak out against what women where and the faith they chose to follow. Yet this is meant to be encouraging liberation ?!Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: disheartened at your generalizationsRE: disheartened at your generalizations
What am I reading here? What are people reading here? What are you trying to teach people about Muslim culture? What are you trying to teach people about this culture that is any different than any other religion and culture that was made by men for men to benefit men?
To use an account of a few people who have been traumatized by oppression and generalize that to the wearing of the hijab is extremely in accurate and biased. Examples of comparative stories to demonstrate your disgusting generalization- Tom is really traumatized by anyone who uses a ruler because his teacher used to beat me back home with it. Sheila is really traumatized by skirts because men used to rape anyone who wears one.
Do you want to talk about tools of oppression? Don’t start with hijab, Why don’t you start with the creation of the patriarchy? Why don’t you start with the regulation of women’s bodies in western world and every other religion in the world? Do you wanna talk about tools of oppression why don’t you start start talking about war and the unnecessary violence that men engage in then pride themselves on as victors, conquerors, masters and more?
How dare you use imagery of a little girl who is empowered, fully in her identity, happy and protected, and taught to be humble as a tool of hate against those who embrace the Hijab.
I believe you’re speaking in extremes. And don’t get me wrong extremes need to be called out and dismantled but you are quite extreme...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Oppressions is attacking women's' choicesRE: Oppressions is attacking women's' choices
Opression is attacking women's choices as the author has done. The author, if he/she so desperately wishes to prove a point, should have procured the necessary causal inference, qualitative or quantitative, labelling a sacred Muslim symbol as a firn if opression. The author, in expressing his/her opinion, has clearly alinged with a particular ideological wing since this is by no means a substatntive scientific inquiry that observes appropriate social sciences research methdology. CMAJ should also carefully consider what opinion pieces they publish as such peices are indicative of their ideological alignment as well.
Competing Interests: I have an affinity towards the hijab as being sacred.References
- M1B6B1
- Page navigation anchor for RE: islamophobiaRE: islamophobia
Dear CMAJ Editorial Board,
I am disgusted by the article written by Sherif Emil, which was published by the CMAJ. This should not have been published by the CMAJ. Has the June 6, 2021 attack on the innocent Muslim family in London, leaving a child orphan, not mean anything to you? This is promoting hate and islamophobia at its finest.
As a hijab wearing Muslim woman, born and raised in Canada, promoted to partnership at my law firm at the age of 29 years old– I am NOT oppressed and I have never been abused or sexually exploited as the article suggests simply because I wear a headscarf.
Please pass on this message to Sherif.
Again, I am deeply appalled by the CMAJ’s decision to keep this article on their site especially given the recent attacks on Muslims in Canada.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
Deeply offended and disappointed by this CMAJ article perpetuating anti-Muslim discrimination.
The harmful stereotyping of Muslim individuals needs to be called out and addressed.
Normalizing anti-Muslim discourse in Canadian politics (Bill 21) leads to anti-Muslim violence, targeted killing (London Ontario murders and Quebec mosque terror attack) and increases Islamophobia. The impact in medicine is no less significant.
I am horrified and fearful to have physician colleagues fuelling deadly stereotypes about their Muslim patients and Muslim colleagues. Equating a hijab with a symbol of oppression, child abuse, or terrorism is in itself oppressive, discriminatory and has lead to violent and deadly attacks on Muslims in Canada.
This would be unacceptable for any faith whether it be the bonnets, turbans, kippah's, crosses, or any other garments.How can medical education teach allyship, equity, and inclusion when the disease is so embedded in the system that targeted acts of religious discrimination are openly published in our so-called academic medical journals?
As a female Muslim physician who has chosen for years to wear hijab along with my hundreds of female Muslim colleagues and friends, we will not be oppressed or silenced by this rhetoric.
Given the deadly nature of anti-Muslim discrimination and the rise of Islamophobia and anti-Muslim stereotyping in medicine (as per U of T's most recent survey), the CMAJ...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.References
- https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/national-muslim-council-policy-recommendations-1.6108161
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5944883/
- Page navigation anchor for Absolute rubbish, discriminatory and a biased generalisation of what the hijab stands for by people who have their own agendaAbsolute rubbish, discriminatory and a biased generalisation of what the hijab stands for by people who have their own agenda
This is just another example of spreading islamophobia, spreading hate and misinformation and the biggest thing of all is a man policing what a woman should wear, her choices and her rights and CMAJ have clearly condoned that. Who is the real oppressor?
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: shockingRE: shocking
As a hijabi woman in the medical field (not a physician) you have absolutely no idea the harm your very basic opinion can and has caused. 1. You are male, sit down and stay in your lane. You are a physician stick to what you are trained in not your extremely biased opinion. 2. Do you think you are some saviour? Do you think the woman specifically in Canada who choose to wear the hijab are weak? I put it on EVERYDAY knowing i am going to encounter people like you. A weak person doesnt do that, an oppressed person doesnt do that. 4. Just say you like seeing skin and want to control what other people wear... my body my choice.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193RE: Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193
Hello,
Please keep the medical journal free of political and religious opinions, those opinions shouldn't have a place in you publications and should belong on other non-medical journals, would you allow a doctor to express his personal opinions about nuns covering their heads and other confirmed abuses done in churchs in your medical journals?
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: cmajRE: cmaj
You are waaaaay off speaking on this. Why is CMAJ talking about bill 21? And how does the CMAJ stand behind the opinions mentioned in this article? The CMAJ should stay clear of this and focus on the field of Medicine.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Islamophobia alive and well amongst Canadian PhysiciansRE: Islamophobia alive and well amongst Canadian Physicians
Islamophobia alive and well amongst Canadian Physicians
I am very disappointed to see that “our” CMAJ has published an openly hateful article against Muslims.
Sherif Emil reveals his animosity towards Muslims - this is concerning as he is treating Muslim children.
Would Sherif Emil be equally disheartened to see Mennonite children in traditional bonnets and consider this “child abuse”?
As a Clinical Professor of Medicine and Director of the Fellowship program in Metabolic Bone Disease at McMaster University I was raised in Canada and chose to cover my hair as a teenager reaffirming my faith and believing in the message of the Holy Quran. Emil Sherif needs to educate himself about Islam - if he did he would read verses such as “there can be no compulsion in religion” (Quran 2:256) Muslim women wear hijab by choice and it is not necessary before puberty. Many young girls however like to copy their Moms and like to wear hijab.
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him emphasized kindness to all and said “you are not a believer unless you love for others what you love for yourself”
Marriage is not permissible without consent and not until after puberty.
At the turn of the century Canadian women and girls covered their hair - would Emil consider this also a form of child abuse? Against Emil’s preposterous and Islamophobic suggestion that Muslim women and girls in hijab cannot ride a bike I answer yes, Muslim women do ride bike...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Most Racist and ISLAMOPHOBIC thing i have readRE: Most Racist and ISLAMOPHOBIC thing i have read
You should be ashamed of yourself for spewing these bigoted and islamophobic sentiments. This is the most ignorant, uninformed, and racist article I have ever read and has no place in a medical journal. My mother and sister and countless other households proudly support and wear hijab and are also some of countries best physicians. We are not an extreme household and neither are the millions of other women who proudly wear hijab. It is precisely these kinds of bigoted and islamophobic rhetoric that leads to attacks and violence against our muslim community and attacks on our places of worship. If you so not take down this article and apologize then you are part of the problem. Shame on you
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusionRE: Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion
This is the most ridiculous, prejudiced and ignorant content I have ever seen written in a letter. I cannot believe the author holds a leadership position. I also cannot believe that the CMAJ published it. The opinion is so misinformed. Sherif Emil needs to redirect his criticism to oppressive MEN and their shameful ideologies rather than the piece of cloth which he admits many wear of their own volition. What's next, no images of a scalpel because it's used for FGM?
Men who criticize the hijab as oppressive do no favours for women and in fact demonstrate the same misogynistic view they are criticizing - that they can tell women what's best for us.
Competing Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Misinformed AuthorRE: Misinformed Author
Personal experiences and views do not reflect the true meaning behind the symbols and practices of another religion or culture. What may seem subordination and oppressive to one may in-fact be something beautiful and liberating to another. This article illustrates perfectly why venturing away from one’s perceived biases and experiences is necessary, especially when it relates to a religion or culture that is different from your own.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: I am hurtRE: I am hurt
Dr Sherif,
Being a hijabi myself I am very hurt by your article.You have decided to paint a negative image and I request that you not speak on my(hijabis) behalf.Also the last mountain we hiked, there was a very young girl climbing it in her hijab and the examples are countless
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for RE: this article is racist and discriminatoryRE: this article is racist and discriminatory
A quick google search shows me that Sherif Emil works in Montreal, Quebec. The same province that introduce the discriminatory bill 21 that prevents people who wear religious symbols from taking positions of authority.
Policing a woman’s body’s is not your job.
Policing women’s bodies is about power. But you already know that.CMAJ: shame on you for publishing this article that harms so many of the Canadian medial community and further puts women who CHOOSE to wear hijab at risk of discrimination. Your role in the fight against discrimination has been duly noted - as an enabler of harassment of women for their choice of clothing and enabler of discrimination against Muslims.
Absolutely disgusting. I will be sharing this across my social media platforms so it is known where CMAJ stands when it comes to diversity and inclusion. We deserve a formal apology from CMAJ and the author of this article for this disgusting act of discrimination.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.
- Page navigation anchor for Islamophobia and misogyny in a recent CMAJ letterIslamophobia and misogyny in a recent CMAJ letter
I was deeply saddened to read Dr. Emil's letter: "Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion" on December 20th 2021 in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.
People wear hijabs for diverse personal reasons. It is deeply unfair to attribute worldwide oppression to one’s personal religious practice — and this is disproportionately the burden of “minority” religions to bear. In our religiocentric Canadian-Catholic society, the Christian cross is seldom judged as harshly. Ultimately, this letter contributes to medical islamophobia and the discrimination of our hijab-wearing colleagues. Studies have shown that Muslim physicians suffer frequent prejudice, stereotyping, and “othering” from both patients and other medical staff.1,2 Hijab-wearing trainees have faced countless microaggressions in the operating room, and have had their commitment to surgery and medicine questioned.3,4 This ignorance of religious beliefs may also contribute to the discrimination of Muslim patients in healthcare as well as gaps in patient-centred care, such as ignoring patient preferences regarding draping.5 Inclusion and celebration of Muslim and hijabi representation is one method to combat these stereotypes and ignorance.
I wholeheartedly agree with the author that misogyny and oppression should be condemned. However, this letter contributes to the very misogyny and oppression that the author seeks to denounce.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Padela AI, Adam H, Ahmad M, Hosseinian Z, Curlin F. Religious identity and workplace discrimination: A national survey of American Muslim physicians. AJOB Empirical Bioethics. 2016 Jul 2;7(3):149-59.
- Abu-Ras W, Senzai F, Laird L. American Muslim physicians’ experiences since 9/11: Cultural trauma and the formation of Islamic identity. Traumatology. 2013 Mar;19(1):11-9.
- Khatun R, Saleh Z, Adnan S, Boukerche F, Cooper A. Covered, but Not Sterile: Reflections on Being a Hijabi in Medicine and Surgery. Annals of surgery. 2021 Mar 1;273(3):e83-4.
- Malik A, Qureshi H, Abdul-Razakq H, et al. I decided not to go into surgery due to dress code’: a cross-sectional study within the UK investigating experiences of female Muslim medical health professionals on bare below the elbows (BBE) policy and weari
- Martin MB. Perceived discrimination of Muslims in health care. Journal of Muslim mental health. 2015;9(2).
- Page navigation anchor for Using religion to promote Islamophobia is not accepted amongst most physicians if not most CanadiansUsing religion to promote Islamophobia is not accepted amongst most physicians if not most Canadians
I have come through the following article that by no mean has anything to do with the truth about Hijab and it’s totally unacceptable I would like to express my worry and concern about using the medical Association journal for personal and political gain and the writer taking only parts of each story from east and west and putting them together in a way that doesn’t make sense and that is not anywhere near the truth about the spirit of the religion. I have attached the article for your kind attention. Your action is highly appreciated.
Allowing articles to link institutional child rape w/hijab is beyond irresponsible.
Hijab is not a symbol, we believe it's a commandment from God that we're proud of & we believe it's part of upright & high moral character
We can not afford to promote discriminative and Islamophobic rhetoric that targets already discrimated Muslim women and girls. This is dangerous and brings back memories of the night of Jan.29th 2017 in Quebec City.
Competing Interests: None declared.References
- Sherif Emil. Don’t use an instrument of oppression as a symbol of diversity and inclusion. CMAJ 2021;193:E1923-E1923.