On September 16 2022, 22 year-old Mahsa Amini died under the custody of Iran’s morality police (the Gasht-e Ershad), after being arrested for improperly wearing her hijab, resulting in her being taken into the Vozara police station, known as the morality police headquarters. Her death has since become a catalyst for uprisings against the Iranian state’s repressive treatment of women, sparking a resurgence of pro-choice debates surrounding veiling.
This raises the central question: what is the socio-political history behind the hijab? Outside of its religious context, how can I, as a western woman, investigate the different spheres behind the veil and understand the increasingly important role of freedom of choice determining its usage? This question is important, as it is only by exposing this subject openly that we can further the conversation and allow free debate.
One might recall a moderately more progressive Iran in the 1960s-70s, as the regime still maintained a firm grip on civil and political freedoms, yet, clothing rules were loosened. As such, some women walked around wearing mini skirts, heels and makeup, while men took their daily strolls in suits, popularized by a western presence in Iran. In fact, during the 1930s, veiling had become forbidden in public areas (such as schools and governmental institutions) under the rule of the Shah Reza Pahlavi, influenced by (Turkish leader) Atatürk’s secular vision for modernization. However, during the 1979 revolution, things took a drastic turn as the monarchy was overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini, establishing a theocratic state in Iran. As such, the veil became compulsory, representing a “hallmark of this new, old order — symbolizing Iran’s decidedly anti-Western way of life,” according to Kersten Knipp. Thus, women’s veils became an important symbol for the establishment of the new-conventional religious Islamic state.
Nonetheless, what is the deeper significance of the hijab? It is rooted in a multitude of factors; religious ideology, political factors and the social order, each playing an important role in the lives of women wearing the hijab.
However, being one of the main foundations of the Iranian regime, the hijab has been used as a token of social control, and particularly, the control of women. Indeed, as Suzanne Azmayesh explains, “the veil conveys the idea that women are responsible for the desire they can cause, and are responsible for protecting themselves from it.” In other words, this encourages victim blaming, which is one of the main premises of patriarchy and rape culture.
Moreover, according to Gilles Paris, per its enforcement, the hijab became a manifestation of “patriarchal subjugation” based on the clerical state’s obsession with purity and order, as opposed to the praise of democratic values such as liberty in the west. The veil is thus the instrument of a system which establishes a hierarchy between the value of a woman and the value of a man. The Iranian government, today ruled by Ali Khamenei, violently imposes the hijab through coercion and public punishment as a way to maintain law and order, enforcing the ideological dogma of piety and purity (which intrinsically translates into the subjugation of women). It is thus impossible to let Iranian women enjoy the freedom of choice as the hijab is a core value of the regime.
It can be interesting to compare Iran’s compulsory veiling with France’s secular approach to the hijab— thus effectively demonstrating the different meanings it can have in different countries.
Veiling has become a rather controversial, yet common, debate in France, a country deeply attached to secularism since 1905 when the state officially separated from the Church. As opposed to Iran, the tension lies in the use of the veil in public spaces, and the pejorative views associated to it especially displayed in the western feminist movement. In France, the veil induces the important debate of secular universalism versus pluralist tolerance – the latter denouncing the islamophobic tendencies of a strict secular state. Moreover, “wearing the veil is perceived as contrary to republican values of liberty, equality and fraternity,” according to Hakim El Karoui. Thus, the acceptance of the veil in public spaces would also demonstrate the country’s failure to practice the democratic values of freedom and equality it preaches, as the veil is viewed as an object of female subjugation. In France, the debate surrounding the prohibition of the veil is based on values intrinsically opposite to Iran. While the Iranian government will kill women in the name of a conservative interpretation of the Qur’an, France wishes to ban the veil in the name of state secularity. However, these approaches do not take into consideration a fundamental element : that of freedom of choice concerning the veil. Indeed, the veil can also be a marker of free will and personal empowerment – as long as it is an individual decision (thus not harshly imposed or harshly frowned upon).
I believe the central point of this debate isn’t to impose nor prohibit the veil, but rather to allow for a right to choose, and for the freedom to do whatever one wants to do with their body, independent from political and religious rules. Indeed, I believe it is important to see both sides of the coin, as wearing (or not wearing) the hijab inherently depends on the person’s choice, and the symbolism they associate with it. According to Mezka Manaal Mazeed, the hijab is a concrete manifestation of the right to choose; she states that “my body belongs to me and I get to choose what I can wear. I choose to cover.” The hijab is “more than just a headscarf,” she adds, defining it as a “spiritual connection” and a “shield.” On the other hand, choosing to remove the hijab can be an equally empowering decision. Masih Alinejad, who started the online campaign “#No2Hijab” in Iran, states that “forcing women to wear hijab is not part of Iranian culture. It is the culture of […] the Islamic Republic.” In this context, removing the hijab is an empowering choice because it acts as a defiance against an extremist regime, liberating women from the shackles of oppression and the loss of personal agency. It should thus be a woman’s decision whether or not she wishes to wear a hijab.
The different significations and nuances behind the hijab can be understood through Jason Farago’s statement: “The veil can be religious or secular, a marker of patriarchal dominance or individual distinction.” Indeed, the veil has many positive aspects associated with it, as women who choose to uphold it do so in a conscious way, to cultivate more modesty and humility. Moreover, wearing the hijab allows a woman to develop her character, making decisions for herself and standing her own ground, according to Yusra Dahri.
Thus, I believe that it is interesting to outline that the veil encompasses various significations based on one’s own vision. We clearly see that it is the value attached to the hijab, rather than the veil itself, which explains why conflicts occur in countries with opposing views surrounding the veil – based solely on its place in society.
To conclude, the veil represents a myriad of different ideological, political and social meanings. It is important, especially in Iran, as it is at the center of its political institutions – used as a tool of social control and reinforcing gender norms imposed by clerical dogmas and patriarchal structures. However, it can also be linked to the debate of liberty vs. oppression, especially in western countries such as France.
Moreover, the multidimensional character pertaining to the hijab sets it in the limelight of one of the most hotly debated social issues of our time. As such, it is important to note that the question here is not whether to impose the veil or not, but rather – to allow for a right to choose. As the Iranian government is now reviewing the law requiring women to cover their heads, this brings more hope for the success of Iranian women fighting for their freedom of choice.
Edited by Sarah St-Pierre & Afreen Mithaiwalla
Sensitivity consulting by Mahnoor Zaman
Carla is a U2 student at McGill studying International Development in the Honors Program with a concentration in Environment. She’s a citizen of the world; as she has French nationality, is of Italian descent, was born in Sweden, lived in the USA and is now living in Canada! Some of her main interests include human rights and most particularly women’s rights, climate change mitigation and poverty alleviation.