This Friday we watched the documentary They Call Me Muslim. The film included two Muslim women, Samah, living in France, and K, living in Iran, with opposite government policies and different opinions on hijab. On the one hand, the French administration banned hijab-wearing in public schools on the ground of promoting secularism; and Samah genuinely believes the teachings of Quran and decides for herself to wear hijab. Samah questions whether the government could associate freedom with veiling. On the other hand, the Iranian government requires every female to wear traditional hijab. K does not like the idea of wearing hijab, resisting the policy by wearing hijab in alternative ways that do not fully cover her hair. K questions the idea that women tempt men and should cover themselves with hijab; instead, K thinks it is not a women problem but rather men’s.

This film has provoked lots of questions: what is freedom? what counts as a religion? Is someone considered to be free only if they are not bound by any religious doctrines? Personally, I do not think hijab itself is a symbol of oppression but rather a cultural and religious expression. As Lila Abu-Lughod suggests that for Muslim believers, wearing hijab is an expression of modesty and demonstrates higher social status for women. Moreover, as Samah’s mother mentions in the documentary, hijab could just be a fashion statement (and I do think the silky and colorful veils Samah wears in the film look very nice). In this sense, hijab is no different than high heels or chokers–they are items that one wears to perform their identity as a woman. Thus, I think that the French administration should not police the meaning of hijab for its citizens. In my opinion, if some girls feel pressured to wear hijab because their classmates question their identity as Muslims, it is better to address anti-bullying policies in general rather than specifically targeting at a certain ethnicity. Furthermore, I question government’s ideology which authoritatively associated individual freedom with secularism. As many ethnographic studies have pointed out, science is the characteristic of modern/western society rather than a universal trait. In other words, while our society is organized around the belief of science, other societies are organized around their own beliefs. Moreover, Clifford Geertz points out that religion serves to maintain social solidarity and offers means for humans to make sense of the world. Thus, while we view beliefs other than science as religion, others view our belief in secularism as religion. Consequently, the idea of secularism is essentially separating one religious belief (in this case, Islam) from another (in this case, science), rather than preventing region from intervening non-religious affairs.

I believe sometimes power creates binaries to establish modes of hierarchy; and in this case, the religious and the secular are coined by power dynamics to legitimatize prioritizing secular ideologies over religious ones. If we blur the boundary between the secular and the religious, our lives might be more free and more livable.

References:

Abu-Lughod, Lila. “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving? Anthropological Reflections on Cultural Relativism and Its Others.” American Anthropologist 104.3 (2002): 783-90. Print.

Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic, 2000. Print.