What is the logic behind asking participants to wear their favourite abaya?
I understand that wearing full Muslim dress is essential for the challenge, but I don’t get the advice about wearing your favourite abaya specifically. This seems strange when you know it’s going to get muddy and potentially damaged. What’s the reasoning behind this?
Responses
Wearing an abaya that carries personal signficance for the participant is completely optional. We acknowledge that this is a difficult decision, and many may choose not to. The logic is in helping to create powerful emotional connections to refugee experience, albeit symbolic.
Obviously, in a simulation of this kind, participants cannot experience the reality of losing one’s home, possessions, their community, or their place in the world. Clearly, the challenge in its entirety is symbolic, from sleeping on hard floors the night before, to walking whilst fasting.
And the same can be said of their chosen garment, perhaps one that holds meaning or value. Maybe it was expensive. Maybe one they cherish. As it becomes muddy and worn, this is perhaps the closest participants to experiencing real loss, paralleling in a very small way the emotional toll faced by refugees who see their everything they cherished destroyed.
Of course in their case, that might be their entire home, let alone keepsakes or individual items. In the worst cases, it could be loved ones, family members, friends. It could even be their own safety. Feelings of loss difficult to truly comprehend.
For your participants, their favourite abaya often carries memories of special occasions, spiritual milestones, meaningful moments. This is the vulnerability you’re leaning into, as the experience creates an authentic emotional response to feelings of loss and regret.
It can be very powerful, but it cannot be forced. Only your participants can decide if that is a journey they wish to accept.
I’d say our best abayas often represent dignity and pride. As it faces the realities of the challenge, you reflect on sacrifices refugees endure – losing homes, communities, sense of self. This shared discomfort often fosters empathy and a deeper connection. It also demonstrates genuine commitment beyond physical participation. This visible sacrifice speaks to seriousness of solidarity with refugee experiences.
In a way, it mirrors what refugees must do – letting go of, or leaving behind entire lives they’ve built. The experience helps participants understand in a very small and imperfect way forced detachment in real raw terms.