Debating The Controversial Hijab/Headscarf/Veil - Understanding Its History And Interpretations In An Essay.

The concept and tradition of Hijab/Headscarf/Veil among Muslim women

Discuss about the Gender Studies for Quran and Hadith Mandate.

Hijab/Headscarf/Veil refers to the traditional is a traditional dress code among Muslim women, which is used to cover the head and face of the women. Traditionally, this is to be worn by the women especially if there is any male outside of their immediate family is present. The term ‘hijab’ is mentioned in the Quran as a form of spatial partition or curtain, referring to the seclusion of women from the public. According to traditional belief, these dresses are used to preserve the modesty of a woman, protecting them from the gaze from other men. However there are disagreements in the various interpretations of the Quran and the Hadith regarding the requirement of women to wear such dresses. Some believe that such is a matter of choice, while other believes that Quran and Hadith mandate all Muslim women to wear such dress to cover their modesty.

As such, the concept of wearing the hijab/veil/headscarf has been debated a lot, with some believing such dress is a symbol of oppression of women, while others believing it the symbol of freedom of choice and liberty.  The feminists who supports the concept of wearing hijab/veil/headscarf, considers such a dress being a symbol of empowerment, and even resistance (Al Wazni 2015). They also believe that western women who wear these dresses show a form of solidarity with the women from other countries in the world, and therefore feel to be a part of a global community. Some considers wearing this dress as a part of the religious duties, and helps them being closer to god, others feel it shows their power to make their own choices, and therefore is an important aspect for them (Abbasi 2017). However several feminists believe that such code is a symbol of female oppression, and that the entire concept stems from the belief that women, if uncovered can be a distraction for men, and therefore requires women to be covered up in public places. These highlights a form of objectification of women, and as a form of ‘distraction’ or an encumbrance, instead of them being considered as equal part in the society (Nomani and Arafa 2015; 2016). Such attitudes are further strengthened by laws in many of the Muslim majority countries in the Middle East (like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan or Iraq), wearing these traditional overalls is mandatory for the women, and penalties are imposed on women who refuses to wear them in public places. There have been several instances where women from many of these countries were seriously rebuked and criticized for not wearing their traditional overalls on the public media, claiming that their acts will lead to discord in their society. This clearly shows that the women in these countries lack the freedom to choose whether they really want to wear any particular type of dress (Gould 2014; Gabriel 2015). Many have criticized that the Muslim Feminists, who are vocal about their consideration of these traditional dresses as liberating, are ‘quiet’ regarding the oppression faced by women in countries like Iran, where sportswomen have been banned from the national team in lieu of failure to wear the traditional headscarf. On 2017, Dorsa Derakhshani, a female chess master was banned from the national team, as she appeared in a tournament without wearing the headscarf (Ozanick 2017; Watson 2017).  Many feel that Muslim feminists living in western countries experiences more liberty and freedom to choose their own lifestyle and make their own career decisions. In such context, they are never made to feel any mandating to wear any particular type of dress. Due to this, they often fail to recognize the oppressive history of this tradition, and also prevent them to see the oppression women from these Muslim countries face. Several feminists have expressed their concerns over the apparent lack of understanding of the plights of the women in the oppressive countries, and how religious traditions and customers are used to implement oppression on women (Byng 2010). Authors like Aayan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan and Tasleema Nasreen have described in great lengths how oppression of women was an inherent part of the Muslim religious belief system, and that the traditional wears were a symbol of that oppression. Aayan Hirsi Ali, who was born in Somalia, was herself subjected to extreme prejudice and oppression, where she grew up believing the traditional dresses were necessary to be worn by women as otherwise a woman not decently covered can cause chaos in the society. Such concepts stuck with her until she was able to escape the oppressive regime of Somalia, and get refugee in Netherlands, where she later became a member of the parliament, and became a strong voice against female oppression in Africa and Middle East . Wafa Sultan, a psychologist by profession, from Syria has also been a strong critique of Islam, and its inherent nature of female oppression, have also protested against the use of these traditional dresses (Sultan 2011). Similarly, Tasleema Nasreen from Bangladesh also shared similar views regarding oppression of women in the name of tradition and culture, and how such aspects take away the freedom of women to make their own choices (Nasrin 2014).

The debate around the Hijab/Headscarf/Veil in the context of feminism and oppression

Several arguments given by different feminists exist both for and against the tradition of wearing hijab/veil/headscarf. However, it is important to look beyond the mere context of the issue: whether Muslim women should wear the traditional dress or whether such traditional dress is oppressive, and should try to understand the history of such traditions and analyze in greater detail any aspects in the religion which might used as a tool of oppression against women, as well as infringe the freedom of expression and rights. In such context, the debate can be moved beyond the context of whether hijab is a symbol of oppression of women, to whether the religion itself propagates the ideology of oppression of women and curbing the rights of expression and individuality (Ali 2008, Sultan 2011). Changing the discourse of the debate can be done by considering certain key events such as the murder of Theo-Van Gough and death threat for Aayan Hirsi Ali in response to their short film called “submissions”, where they criticize the position of women in Islam or the religious riots that occurred due to cartoons posted by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, which resulted in several deaths (Burke 2004; Telegraph.co.uk 2018). Such examples have been cited by many journalists and authors to be the proof that at a fundamental level, Islam propagates and fosters intolerance and inequalities. According to many scholars, the Sharia law encourages domestic violence against women, and a husband has the authority to punish his wife if found to be rebellious. The Sharia law also ignores the rights of the women who suffer from domestic abuse, instead legitimizing such acts. The discrimination is further propagated by unequal rights given to men and women in context of property rights and their value of their testimony, compared to that of a man. As per Sharia law, the testimony of a woman is worth half of that of a man, and has lesser rights to family property, and generally can be half of that of her siblings (Sultan 2011).This highlights a deep seated aspect within the religious constructs which allows inequalities towards women to be propagated and fostered. It is therefore a high time that feminists, humanists, and human rights activists should focus away from the symbolisms of the dress code, and actually address the overt and covert inequalities faced by women in these Muslim countries, and identify how such atrocities have been legitimized and rationalized by the religious indoctrination. It is therefore essential to identify the real demon of religious indoctrination and dogma that undermines human equality, and breeds the grounds for oppression for women.

References:

 Abbasi, W. 2017. Hijab becomes symbol of resistance, feminism in the age of Trump. [online] USA TODAY. Available at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/03/15/hijab-becomes-symbol-resistance-feminism-age-trump/98475212/ [Accessed 17 Apr. 2018].

Al Wazni, A.B., 2015. Muslim women in America and hijab: A study of empowerment, feminist identity, and body image. Social work, 60(4), pp.325-333.

Byng, M.D., 2010. Symbolically Muslim: media, hijab, and the West. Critical Sociology, 36(1), pp.109-129.

Gabriel, M.A., 2015. Islam and Terrorism (Revised and Updated Edition): The Truth about Isis, the Middle East and Islamic Jihad. Charisma Media.

Gould, R., 2014. Hijab as commodity form: Veiling, unveiling, and misveiling in contemporary Iran. Feminist Theory, 15(3), pp.221-240.

Nasrin, T., 2014. Lajja. Penguin UK.

Nomani, A. Q., & Arafa, H. 2016. Wearing the hijab in solidarity perpetuates oppression. Retrieved February, 26, 2017.

Nomani, A.Q. and Arafa, H., 2015. As Muslim women, we actually ask you not to wear the hijab in the name of interfaith solidarity. The Washington Post.

Ozanick, B. 2017. Feminism, Hijabs and Hypocrisy | Clarion Project. [online] Clarion Project. Available at: https://clarionproject.org/feminism-hijabs-and-hypocrisy/ [Accessed 17 Apr. 2018].

Sultan, W., 2011. A God who Hates: The Courageous Woman who Inflamed the Muslim World Speaks Out Against the Evils of Islam. St. Martin's Press.

Telegraph.co.uk 2018. Prophet Mohammed cartoons controversy: timeline. [online] Telegraph.co.uk. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11341599/Prophet-Muhammad-cartoons-controversy-timeline.html [Accessed 17 Apr. 2018].

Watson, L. 2017. Chess player banned by Iran for not wearing a hijab switches to US. [online] The Telegraph. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/03/chess-player-banned-iran-not-wearing-hijab-switches-us/ [Accessed 17 Apr. 2018].