Tuesday, 18 September 2012

A woman’s clothing is her own business



Barring random news items and a few opinion pieces, the Hijab debate has never really been part of the national narrative of Pakistan. Those who wanted to wear hijab/niqab/burqa wore it and those who preferred the traditional shalwar kameez duppatta chose that without any problem. Unlike Saudi Arabia, Iran or Turkey, there never was governmental coercion or pressure on women to go for particular type clothing or to ban a particular type of clothing in state institutions. A woman’s clothing was her own business as it should be anywhere in the world. However, things are changing and with the celebration of World Hijab Day which had tacit approval of the government and the patronage of the first lady Nusrat Pervaiz Ashraf who presided over the Hijab Conference organized by Jamaat-i-Islami, things are moving in the direction where state is turning partisan.

The first lady of Pakistan, during the aforementioned conference supported Muslim women to wear a hijab, saying that women could do what they wanted as long as they respect the “limits set by Islam”.

The first lady’s speech encourages women to follow the 'limits' set by Islam, but no one can agree on what it entails; one school of thought believes that there should be no hindrance to anyone’s education – including women – while the other believes that women should only be allowed access to education if there are segregated educational institutions for them, right up to the higher education. Another school of thought believes that women need no access to higher education as their true calling lies in maintaining a household and raising children. If the speech of the first lady is carefully viewed, she perhaps supports the third version of ‘limits set by Islam’. In her speech, the first lady urged women to strengthen the ‘family unit’, which she said was central to Islamic teachings. As if this was not all, she also regretted that "Pakistani women were starting to forget how important family and hijab were."

For starters, there is no direct relationship between a woman’s hijab and her care giving responsibilities towards her family. Secondly, Pakistani women have not forgotten how important family is for them. If anything, family interferes with their performance at work because of the overwhelming demands of their families on their time. Thirdly, positioning hijab with better motherhood and more fulfilled family life puts the women who do not wear hijab but are just as, if not more, concerned about their families, in an uncomfortable situation in a homogenous society like ours.  If such views gain official state patronage, it can and will act against the women who do not abide by this particular view.

The first lady ended her speech by calling Fatima Jinnah and Benazir Bhutto “role models” for Pakistani women. However, she failed to point out that neither Benazir Bhutto, nor Fatima Jinnah followed those particular limits she so favoured in her speech. Both Ms. Bhutto and Ms. Jinnah were highly educated women who studied with men; they did not limit themselves to raising children or their families and had highly visible political careers. Ms Jinnah was so dedicated to her political career that she did not even marry and have a family of her own and Ms Bhutto was back in her office a fortnight after giving birth to her second child. Last but not the least, neither wore a hijab but favoured the traditional Pakistani dupatta. 

There are many issues that plague Pakistani women that can do with the attention of the first lady; it would be advisable if she focuses on them instead of the hijab/duppata debate. 


First published in The Express Tribune

PS: The comments that are posted on the Express Tribune website are priceless, there are at least two which basically say that hijab is NOT a choice. Pretty interesting, eh?

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm all for women under 40 wearing Hijab.Mashallah, they look sexy in hijabs.

krishna pachegonker said...

Hijab coercion to wen in mudlm cpuntries is fanaticism.women lole u r endangerrd species

krishna pachegonker said...

Hijab coercion to wen in mudlm cpuntries is fanaticism.women lole u r endangerrd species

Malik said...

In life, you have to distinguish between things as they are, and things as you think they should be. You think that a woman *should* be able to choose what she wears, when in reality she can't. The reasons are many. The first is personal security. You would be more secure stepping out of your house in traditional clothing with a big dupatta, accompanied by another man or woman, than you would be in a revealing dress. That's true of most of Pakistan. The big cities are of course a whole different world.

The second reason is family honour/respect. I'd rather not show my face to anyone ever again than have people tell me how a woman of my family was seen walking around in less than respectable dress. And that sense of honour is not limited to men, as most feminists will have you believe. To most women, their families' name is just as important as to the men.

People like you make the mistake of demanding that everyone change the way they have lived their lives for generations, just so they can accommodate your personal choices. Also, most women in Pakistan are content with the way they dress. You are a minority.

radius said...

A couple of week before World Hijab Day, I met a group of Arab families from the Westbank, who came to the beach at Tel Aviv to celebrate what I called Wet Hijab Day. Have a look at my blog http://persian-cat.de/?p=2675 and enjoy, as I did. I recognised that to many of them, the hijab seems to be mainly a traditional piece of clothes, rather than a demonstration of religious soul.

judith said...

if the view of some on this blog could be believed then wearing a hijab should make them safe, however that is not the case, they are still afraid to go out alone, so stop using this as an excuse to push your views.
If this was the case then all females in middle easter countries would be living the safest lifes, that is not the case however