[mattkrause]

I think the point is that there’s a human on the other side too, not faceless corporation.

Rhetorically, the story works just as well if it’s a scary-looking guy in a biker jacket, helping his sister open a ballet studio, or someone clad head-to-toe in Rangers’ gear.

[z9znz]

> scary-looking guy in a biker jacket, helping his sister open a ballet studio

I think this illustrates the possible unspoken angle of the post. Is the post trying to show a surprising contrast? And if so, should I be surprised to see anyone, hijab or not, working in a family pharmacy store while also working on their MD?

With your example, a scary-looking guy in a biker jacket evokes a certain feeling (fear, worry, etc.), but then we find out that he's just a good guy helping his sister do something that's very unlike his nature - or the nature we would assume a "scary-looking" guy in a biker jacket would be about.

By this example, I would take it to mean that your interpretation is that a girl in a hijab is a scary person to worry about, but in reality she's just a good, smart, hard-working girl helping her family.

This is why I raised the initial question. These couple of extra specific details lead somewhere. I wanted to know where, because the perspective was not provided. The reader was left to make their own assumptions or draw conclusions. Based on your example, we see one conclusion: fear of people in hijabs, but that such fear is not appropriate.

I take the perspective that the hijab doesn't represent a special person nor a person to fear any more than a guy with a baseball cap on his head sideways means something other than "he likes to wear a cap in a way that doesn't block the light from his eyes".

[mattkrause]

Nope. At least for me, the details are meant to sketch striking human characters that you want to support, whether they are plucky (children of) immigrants, surprising family men, or hometown characters [0]. The rhetorical contrast is not a hijab-less woman, jacket-less man, or Dallas Cowboys fan.

Instead, consider this over-the-top example: "Augustus P. Moneybags, who owns 51% of the parent company Amalgamated Holdings, said deodorant theft reduced earnings per share from $1.20 to $1.19 this year. Although the company still turned record profits, he vowed to crack down on it. Specific plans were not available at press time, as Mr. Moneybags had left on his yacht." Here, I can imagine thinking "Meh, who cares? Maybe people need deodorant more tan this guy needs money."

[0] You didn't mention Rangers guy, but if it wasn't clear from context, the NY Rangers are a local hockey team. Nothing scary about them, except perhaps their recent mediocrity.