Let's start with what the liberals have got right about the Hijab row. They have correctly identified this as a matter of choice of clothing, acceptance of complete 'Muslimness' and to some extent the whataboutery w.r.t. inclusion of articles of other religions. Only place where they're going dead wrong is on the place of their application; the schools.
The inclusion of certain religious articles in a school uniforms must pass the test of whether they convey the ideals, which ironically in this case, has to be liberal. There should not be any visible marks, clothing or any article on a school uniform that conveys poor ideals. Hijab unfortunately just does that.
In its most benign use case where some women are willingly taking it up, what are they exactly conveying? They are conveying that they need to cover themselves decently, so that the OTHER gender don't molest them. This is possibly the most regressive thought about women's liberation, statu of full equality and their right to security that the society is obligated to provide to all citizens, without moralistic judgement. It passes the blame of a possible molestation or sexual assaults of a person who doesn't wear a Hijab from the perpetrators to the victim. This is exactly what liberals have preached the right wingers to guard against for the last decade, and rightly so. Imagine the snigger and the pressure Hijabis may unknowingly put on the non Hijabis because of the moral superiority derived from higher %adherence to Islamic injunctions.
Now, being non muslim myself I can't correct that anachronism. That has to be done by the Muslims themselves by recognising that as a fact that has passed the sell by date. When or to what extent that happens in India, no one knows. Till then, you may expect some people to continue to wear Hijab, Chador or Burka for religious intents. And that's completely fine, it's their life and their choices. However, this matter of choice must be even open when one is an adult, because this is an adult subject. Any choice, however religious it may appear, that has its roots in forming an individual's ideas about sexual violence must happen when they're mature enough to be able to take the decisions. Till then, secular education about sexual violence in schools should be the norm. Allowing Hijab destroys those hard earned concepts not just for the wearer but also for other girls by way of influence. As a father of a girl child, I wouldn't want that. I want her to understand the matter of sexual violence in the right context. Some commentators have also argued that wearing a Hijab doesn't change the understanding of the sexual violence and the responsibility of the perpetrators then why wear it in the first place? Is the wearer then not wearing the Hijab for its spirit? That kind of hypocrisy must be called out.
I am not even calling into question what happens if someone doesn't wear a Hijab or a Burka, or how much family pressure is on the individual because it may depend on family to family. But to say it doesn't happen at all is naive. Just look at what happened to the 12th topper from J&K. I won't bank on the false equivalence with Sikh Turbans or a Janeu or Tika or even a Islamic Amulet. They don't convey anything opposite to the ideals of equality that our ancestors fought so hard for. Not in the government and non Islamic minority schools anyway.
Write a comment ...