After the heinous terror attacks upon churches in Sri Lanka, the government there has announced a temporary ban on burqas for reasons of national security. This spurred discussions in India about a similar ban. The mouthpiece of the Shiv Sena, Saamna, suggested a similar measure in its editorial. This incensed some Islamic clerics who defended the burqa and called for the banning of the ghooghat in the same breath.
It is exhausting how much we keep discussing women's bodies and their right to wear /not wear clothing of their choice. A top athlete like Serena Williams is censured for what she wears while playing tennis. However, vast column inches are not dedicated to the style or length of the clothing of male athletes. It is 2019 and we’re still debating what women should and shouldn’t wear!
On the one hand are those who believe women should dress modestly because not doing so is to ‘invite’ rape and other abuse. On the other hand are those who make instant assumptions about a woman’s education, background and mindset based on how modern or old fashioned her clothing is perceived to be. One segment of the populace views women in modern clothing as ‘shameless’ or as ‘asking for it’. The other segment seems to believe that woman clothing choices are the measure of her emancipation of lack thereof.
There is no doubt that the custom of women covering their faces is a result of a patriarchal social structure. It is rooted in the archaic assumption of male ownership of the female body. In patriarchal systems, female ‘purity’ and ‘modesty’ are tied to family ‘honour’. As such, a woman's actions are controlled and her agency determined by her family; particularly the men in her family. It is the female who is charged with the upholding of this mythical ‘honour’, so she must do whatever necessary to ‘save’ herself from other predatory males: stay indoors, not work outside the home, have her education curtailed… the list of strictures is very long.
A particularly stringent way to police women's bodies is the enjoinment for women to cover their faces. Face coverings are different from head coverings. While men also use head coverings to denote religious denomination or social position, there is no requirement of face covering among men. When women are required by custom – social or religious – to cover their faces, this conceals identity. It robs women of their individuality; their personhood.
Most of us would agree that the custom of face covering is egregious when women are forced into it either directly, covertly or via coercion. But what about women who want to cover; who feel the need to do so for reasons or religious faith or as a personal choice? Well, this is where it gets complicated.
There may be men (and women) who say women of their family cover out of choice and not compulsion. However, that ‘choice’ is mired in ambiguity. In many families, there may not be an express injunction to cover, but there is approval and reward for covering. It is subtly conveyed that covering is a desirable choice. Hence the woman/women in the family decide to cover of their seeming free will or because they want to please others in their family. This is not free will.
Proponents of the ban feel that there is a security angle to this as well; that face covering should be banned to prevent individuals disguising themselves or ferrying dangerous items. So should all face covering be banned?
Women who choose to cover out of their own free choice – free of pressure or coercion – are going to be negligible in number. However, there could well be women who do choose to cover – of their own free will. Reasons could range from religious faith to personal belief, to the desire to protect skin from the elements. The supposed security threat posed by face covering is possibly exaggerated. Those who wish to conceal a weapon or their identity can find various ways to do this: coats, shawls, head covering. After all, the recent terror attacks in India and Sri Lanka were not carried out by burqa-clad people looking to evade being caught.
In the end, people simply need to stop policing women's bodies and their choices. We need to stop playing politics over what women choose to wear and not wear. We certainly need to bring about the kind of social change that empowers women to make truly free choices: education, access to resources, the same opportunities as males and a secure environment... that is the change we need to bring, not the banning of this and that; not rules that impinge upon and restrict the existing choices that women have.
For me, the ghoonghat or burqa may be repugnant; the symbol of female subjugation. However, it may not be the same for other women. One way or the other, it has to be the woman's own choice – no one else's.
Do you have something interesting you would like to share? Write to us at [email protected]
