International organizations trying to help should change their approach. Instead of giving the government just the money to build education in Balochistan, which eventually will only aid in more corruption and trickle down to some development in other provinces, they should put more context-specific effort into the problem, as discussed in class. For example, they should buy and give the government physical resources like school furniture, books with Balochi culture, stationery, etc. Or some of thier own staff could be trained and employed to teach in Balochistan for some time to sustainably build an education system only for the welfare of Baloch people.

Exactly, Eman, the irony is just incredible. One of the most significant efforts by the Balochi people for their heritage is that they actively communicate with their children in Balochi. Because of their cautious efforts, the language is still alive despite all the ignorance. But many high school students leave Balochistan to develop better careers in institutes outside Balchistis, taking away the only hope it has: the youth who can make a difference.

I think teachers and administrators should avoid taking sides. Since they are in a better power position than the students, when a teacher sides with a student, that student's stance automatically becomes more socially legitimate and mostly holds invisible power over the student without teacher support. Such neutrality on the faculty's part would increase student participation and help them work out their stance. Other than that , explicit punishments for extremist actions, hateful speech should exist. They should be repeatedly and clearly communicated to the student body and reinforced whenever needed. Any such incidents should be handled with strict action to set sustainable examples and enforce a tolerant campus culture. Such as, the strict anti-harassment policies at Lums allow us to express our opinions on all sorts of things in a safe environment.

In my opinion, voicing your thoughts should always be your priority. However, there are levels to it, keeping in mind your safety. It should always be done respectfully, and students should be taught tolerance and the skill to express conflicting opinions without triggering the other side. That is the whole point of educating yourself; after learning all these things about the world, in such real-life problems, you take rational stances and well-informed decisions. For yourself and those around you.

https://www.economic-policy.org/75th-economic-policy-panel/islamic-veil/ https://humsci.stanford.edu/feature/stanford-scholars-report-french-headscarf-ban-adversely-impacts-muslim-girls Dear Shamsa, these are the sources I used for the statistics. They have research conducted by well-qualified professors from prominent universities such as Stanford. That's the credibility check on my part. However, they used data from the French Labour Force Survey to compile results of the effects of the hijab ban on education performance rates. Both use the same primary resource but still present conflicting views. That is why I mentioned the presence of media biases in my blog. There is a possibility of specific organizations or governments funding research and publishing it to improve the legitimacy of their actions and circulate them. But then again, it's just an assumption. Addressing your second question, it's a very personal aspect of the problem, where we can't conclude whether it has helped girls relieve social pressure or not. Some of them, behind closed doors, may still be pressured to wear hijab and quit school, and we may never know about it. Or, for some girls, life might have become easier with the hijab ban. So it's a very subjective and complex issue.

Exactly... how is a mere piece of cloth a threat? It's acceptable as a fashion statement, as facemasks during COVID-19, or as mufflers and beanies. But suddenly, a problem when used in any way by Muslim women. Plain hypocrisy.

Sarwat, I feel like you are asking all the right questions. The irony of the whole situation is a little comical. Freedom of expression in how you dress should be the least of the government's concerns under a secularist policy. It's like they contradict themselves and don't know it yet.