The Iranian regime’s enforcement of the hijab is once again in global headlines, with recent footage showing a Persian woman stripping in public as an act of protest. The memory of Mahsa Amini’s death in custody, allegedly for wearing her hijab improperly, remains painfully fresh.
It’s quite saddening that in the 21st century, women in Iran are still fighting for personal agency. It’s not that the people of Iran don’t want change, according to a 2020 survey by the Group for Analysing and Measuring Attitudes in Iran (GAMAAN) — 72 per cent of Iranians oppose compulsory hijab laws, with 58 per cent expressing that they do not believe in hijab altogether. However, the Iranian authority sees it as an act of defiance from the prism of politics.
The same old argument
Let’s be clear, the Iranian regime operates as an authoritarian system where the Supreme Leader and his loyalists firmly control the nation’s political and social landscape. As is typical with authoritarian rule, there exists an acute fear within the leadership that any shift, however small, might unravel the regime’s grip on power. In such a theocratic authoritarian regime, even slight adjustment can be seen as a vulnerability in the system, setting a precedent that could inspire further demands for reform or change. Therefore, to the Iranian authorities, relaxing hijab laws would not only weaken their religious and ideological stance but also risk signalling an openness to broader freedoms, a potential domino effect they are desperate to avoid.
Modesty has long been used as the trope to defend the enforced hijab on women, claiming that it keeps women safe in public. It is the same age-old patriarchal argument suggesting that women’s safety depends on their attire rather than addressing the real issue: society’s attitude toward women. Actually, it’s a form of victim blaming that holds women accountable for crimes against them; that women must modify their behaviour and clothing to be ‘worthy’ of safety. This flawed logic fails to address the root causes of gender-based violence and instead burdens women with the responsibility to prevent it.
Also read: Khamenei trivialising Gaza suffering by comparing it to India. He must look in his own backyard
What ‘liberals’ say
As a woman, one might expect liberals to be natural allies in defending her right to choice and in condemning legally mandated dress codes. However, during a debate on Times Now, I was struck by the bizarre arguments I witnessed. Rather than addressing the core issue, some participants diverted attention or engaged in unnecessary whataboutery, sidestepping the real conversation on women’s freedom and autonomy. Some of them who fought for girls’ right to wear burka and hijab in classrooms argued that Iranian laws are based on sharia. As if that makes it okay to snatch away the women’s right to choose. Many said that stripping in public was indecency, and that even in India it would be unacceptable.
When people argue that hijab is a choice but fail to condemn its enforcement by authorities, it exposes a clear hypocrisy. Their concern seems to be with defending specific clothing rather than supporting a woman’s right to choose. ‘Choice’ is just a convenient argument for the moment and not a genuine commitment to principle.
Another questioned: What about Indian schools/colleges banning hijab and burka? While India has never imposed a national ban on any particular attire for women, institutions and colleges may have their own guidelines or uniforms. This form of whataboutery is both irrelevant and unnecessary when discussing the issue at hand, as it diverts attention from the core topic.
Gatekeeping support
The most striking aspect was witnessing the social media meltdown of some liberal Muslims over Iranian women protesting against the enforcement of hijab. Their outrage was directed not at the brutal enforcement but at perceived ‘Islamophobia’ in the portrayal of the morality police. The absurdity reached new heights when women protesting against the hijab was referred to as ‘sisters’. Not only this, some even had a problem with the kind of people supporting Iranian women. The argument was that if you don’t agree with or show solidarity with Muslim women in any part of the world, you have no right to speak for Iranian women. This reasoning is both illogical and dismissive as it creates unnecessary barriers to solidarity on an issue that transcends borders.
On the one side, there is the fight against patriarchal society and authoritarian forces; on the other, there are so-called liberal Muslim women who was supposed to be allies in fight for basic human rights, autonomy, and the freedom to choose. But sadly, attempts to dilute or redirect this conversation — whether through whataboutery, accusations of Islamophobia, or gatekeeping who can stand in solidarity — serve to distract one from the core issue: the right of women to live without oppression. At its heart, this debate is not just about the hijab.
Amana Begam Ansari is a columnist. She runs a weekly YouTube show called ‘India This Week by Amana and Khalid’. She tweets @Amana_Ansari. Views are personal.
(Edited by Humra Laeeq)
Someone named Sayema wrote a disgusting article on this issue yesterday and The Print decided to publish it. Somehow, Ms. Sayema managed to drag in RSS/BJP/Hindutva into this issue and laid the blame at their door.
No condemnation for the Islamist regime of Iran or of the Shariah law or even the concept of the burqa.
Typical Muslim middle class attitude towards Islamic fanaticism.
To stand for choice of the women is the right thing. But to restrict that choice only to what you think a women should wear is wrong.
Many men support the Iranian women’s choice to not wear a Hijab in Iran but not the choice of a women to wear a Hijab in India.
And to add to that some of these same men support women wearing gunghat or parda. So clearly there is an element of communal hypocrisy