“You make my skin twitch”, heard she who was wearing hijab, who already felt that all the eyes were on her. Imagine when you stand out from everyone in a place, and everyone is staring at you and judging you. It's hard to put ourselves in the other’s shoe, but it becomes easy for us to judge them. How does a hijab-clad or burka clad woman feel when mistreated for being different for their cultural differences? When any one hears the narrative of abuse and differential treatment of hijab-clad women, one could easily see that they are blamed for their choices. And then some people affirm the opinions of the sceptics that hijab is oppressive towards the women. Statements like "If you take uncovered meat and put it on the street… without a cover and the cats eat it, is it the fault of the cat or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem. If the woman is in her boudoir, in her house and if she's wearing the veil and if she shows modesty, disasters don't happen. Satan tells women, you re my weapon to bring down any stubborn man” draws the society back to thousand centuries. The statement was uttered by Mufti Sheikh Taj al- Din-Hilali of Australia. Although these declarations were ridiculed both by religious leaders and women’s rights activists. Such statements somewhere help in sustaining the ideas that hijab is oppressive.
People like Sahar Al Faifi who made their choice to wear the niqab, are always fighting for their options in the midst of all the growing chaos on banning the hijab. In many countries of the West, they have been seen as diverse. “We are a minority within minority” argued Sahar Al-Faifi who is an executive member of Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), when she was asked about her stance on the United Kingdom Independent Party’s policy (UKIP) on banning veil or full face covering in the United Kingdom for security reasons. The idea of hijab is seen to conflate with the notion of headscarves which is worn by Muslim women. This comes along with the verdict of European Court of Justice legalising banning of hijab in any public funded institutions. These are one of the few instances where countries have been allowed to penalized people for respecting their cultural or religious practices.
The West have always been championed for modernity and the principles of equality, however, the practice of such might have led to contentious policies. The torchbearers of modernity see hijab or the varied kinds of veiling as against the universal principle of equality and secularism. The multifaceted perspectives on hijab are it any kind brings out the complications and intricacies in looking into the whole issue of hijab. The principle of freedom and equality is seen to clash with the ideals with multicultural practices in plural societies of the west. With banning Hijab in public places, French was the first country which put out the ideals of secularism in cultural freedom. On the one hand, when the West is trying to ban hijab or any religious symbols in the public places, there are countries like Saudi Arabia which penalises any women who do not choose to cover themselves with Niqaab or any other headscarves. The difficulty in pointing out one right practice is disrespecting the others cultural choices. How does one than deal with the issue while formulating any policies for the integration of the minority culture and practices? It is not that only Muslim women wear headscarves, but the practice is evident within other religion like Christianity and also Judaism. But the question that intrigues me is why then the cultural practice of Muslim women is brought into question. Also, how can a country progress when it tries to regulate that everyone should look the same. The problem with standard practice is that it tries to silences the voices of many while trying to keep up the voices of other. The whole discourse of hijab has to be located in this context
One to talk about the issue needs to see how the religion views hijab or veiling. The term ‘hijab’ which is often considered to conflate with the idea of “headscarf”. However, such a conflation is erroneous. Conflating 'hijab' with a headscarf is flawed. “Hijab” in literal terms refer to “curtain” in Arabic which appears seven times in the Quran. Out of which only two of these manifest the quality of screening off a woman from the gaze of others, one from non-family members while the other is from family members. It is perhaps this quality of testing a woman from the outside gaze that gave rise to the standard nomenclature for modest covering, in some cases specifically the cover used to hide from view her hair, neck and neckline that most Muslim women use. The others also describe the function of the ‘hijab’ screen as a guard, though not necessarily a guard for females against attracting a male controlling gaze or even a solid guard obscuring searching eyes. Hijab is an Arabic word which means partition or barrier. Hijab, in Islam, has a broader meaning. Hijab refers to the principle of modesty in behaviour as a dress for both males and females. Hijab has not been specified in Quran, but the idea of modesty in dressing and covering finds its place within Quran. Moreover, Quran has mentioned modest dressing for both men and women. The practice of hijab is also varied within the Islamic people. The word “hijab” describes the act of covering up generally but is often used to describe the headscarves worn by Muslim women. The type most commonly worn in the West covers the head and neck but leaves the face clear. The “niqab” is a veil for the face that leaves the area around the eyes clear. However, it may be worn with a separate eye veil. It is worn with an accompanying headscarf. The “burka” is the most concealing of all Islamic veils. It is a one-piece veil that covers the face and body, often leaving just a mesh screen to see through. The “al-amira” is a two-piece veil. It consists of a close fitting cap, usually made from cotton or polyester, and a tube-like scarf. The “Shayla” is a long, rectangular scarf popular in the Gulf region. It is wrapped around the head and tucked or pinned in place at the shoulders. The khimar is a long, cape-like veil that hangs down to just above the waist. It covers the hair, neck and shoulders completely, but leaves the face clear. The “chador”, worn by many Iranian women when outside the house, is a full-body cloak. It is often accompanied by a smaller headscarf underneath.
The Quran which is the religious text of the Islam asks both men and women to dress modestly but not explicitly has mentioned anything as hijab. Thus to understand that it is oppressive for women to be forced into wearing can be seen. However, what about the women who choose to wear it. Women see it as a cultural symbol which draws them closer to God. How can one avoid such narrative? The principle of equality between the men and women also imply that both men and women should be given equal freedom what to wear and what not to. The freedom to the choice of women is brought into question when a woman is being discriminated on wearing the hijab or niqab.
One has to look at how the Islamist feminist look at the idea of Hijab to further problematise the Western notion of feminism. There is a two-fold cultural context for the decision to wear Hijab- the assumption by many non-Muslim critiques of Islam’s inherent violation of women’s “equal rights” and a widespread Muslim critique of Western culture for its individualism, materialism and lax sexual mores. Hijab has multiple meaning, as a religious and social symbols; it provides a clear identity marker at a life-course transitional time, and it provides culturally legitimate space for young women who are formulating their national religious identities. H. Afshar argued that women in Islamist politics display a range of opinions and strategies, but they share a common contestation of Western definitions women’s rights. The Female Islamist feminist blames the ‘west’ which failed to deliver liberation to women. Najmabandi also considers Islamic feminism as a discourse in its right rather a reaction to Western or state repression. Islamic Feminism as Margot Badron defines is a feminist paradigm and practice articulated within an Islamic paradigm. The basic argument of Islamic feminism is that the Quran affirms the principle of equality of all human beings but the practice of equality of women and men has been impeded or subverted by patriarchal ideas and practices. A priority of Islamic feminism is to go straight to Islam’s fundamental and central holy text, the Quran, to recuperate its egalitarian message. Lacey Sloan argues that the dominant worldview particularly the Western one, of women in abayas, shailas and niqabs is that these garments are symbols of oppression. This is a very simplistic understanding. El Guindi argued that veiling, abayas, shailas, hijab and burkas can be powerful symbols not only of modesty and privacy. Also, Hijab is not about a symbol of women’s oppression but of women’s devotion to Islam. One cannot overlook these intricacies that involves forming any stereotypical perspective on the whole idea and practice of hijab.
International Community which is led by the West had been the self-appointed guardian of freedom and rights of women. However, doing so sometime it turns into the debate between how different cultural practices deal with the universal ideals of equality and rights. Thus whenever countries like France come up with a legal policy of banning the hijab and other religious symbols like turban becomes a hot bed of debate and well-drawn criticism. With the European Court of Justice banning Hijab in public educational institution, has rechristened the whole debate on hijab. A girl wearing a hijab can be stopped from getting her right to education. These can create barriers between non-hijab wearing women and hijab-wearing women.
The whole 9/11 incident brought the fear of terrorism into global politics. The problem arises when terrorism is linked with a particular religion. The abuse and racial slurs to the women in hijab have intensified with the rise of Islamophobia. This is evident with the UKIP rooting for banning full-face veiling for security issues. Such has led to hue and cry by Islamic women rights activists for obstructing people’s right to choose. Sahar Al-Faifi believes that if security was such an issue then women in niqab more than happy to reveal their identity when necessary.
Hijab is close to women who wear it. It is a symbol of their culture. One cannot avoid these underpinnings when discussing any policy on hijab. If certain countries force women what to wear and what not to then it is fundamentally against the ideals of freedom and rights. It is indeed a cosmopolitan world, where there is evidence of multicultural practices. And in this world we are constantly out casting the opinion of those who wear it, live with it, making it a choice every single day. We live in a global village today and it will be unfair to obstruct a person or a group belonging to one single place only. On the other hand, there are instances of antisocial activities taking place in aid of “Hijab” which give rise to the feelings of insecurity manifested into hatred against the wearing of “Hijab”. Instances of bomber escaping in burqa or instances like robbers in burqa distances the people who come in support of women wearing them. It is indeed difficult to integrate differences within society and questions like How can one make a balance between ones choice and others insecurities? How can one integrate differences when the policy of common practice is in place? –should be kept in our minds while looking at the whole debate of hijab.
