Removing the Veil: Women’s Empowerment or Western Assimilation?

In Leila Ahmed’s Women and Gender in Islam, the argument concerning the act of wearing the veil or deciding to take it off is an intriguing one. Ahmed is clear in saying that “Islamic societies did not oppress women,” but the focus of the veil is based on Western society rather than the interests of the women in the Middle East (167). She points out that the first advocates of removing the veil came from men: men who Ahmed claim the West greatly influenced, and who only wanted their women to remove the veil in order to appear “modernized.” Ahmed argues that the men are not trying to empower the women, but rather strip them of their cultural heritage. When the woman is making the choice to wear the veil, any person telling her that she should not or that it is oppressing her is simply removing the woman’s freedom through his or her “advocacy.” The argument of the veil is a metaphor of a larger argument Ahmed is expressing. Ahmed notes that many “advocates” struggle with distinguishing between cultural and religious origins of practices and clothing, and that the distinction needs to be made before promoting any true change.

Ahmed feels strongly about increasing the rights and liberties of women and appears fed up with the concentration on clothing choices as the Western feminist movement. “The feminist agenda as defined by Europeans was also incorrect in it particularities, including its focus on the veil” (287). Ahmed goes on to say that because of this focus, many terms have become associated with the veil, and that the only way oppression can be fought is by the removing of the veil. The logic behind the focus of the veil does not make sense. There are definite rights that women need, but removing the veil is not going to gain those rights. There needs to be more awareness and understanding of the complexity of the veil. In a statement that sums up the message Ahmed wants us to understand is that “Arab and Muslim women need to reject the androcentrism and misogyny that they find themselves in, but that is not at all the same as saying they have to adopt Western culture or reject Arab culture and Islam comprehensibly” (166).

Most Western people share the feelings of the early feminists about the veil, but it is critical to understand the origins of the veil before creating assumptions. The veil is not something created by Islam, but it was adopted from the Greeks and Byzantines at the time of Mohammed. The prophet’s wives adopted the practice because certain people thought his wives should not be as exposed to the world. The Koran does not mention the veil. It only commands Muslims, men and women, should retain modesty. Most people follow from the example of Mohammed’s wives in believing that they should veil, but no one can be sure if Mohammed intended for people to veil in the name of God, and Islam. Even in recent American history, it was common for women to cover their hair in public. If they did not they would be scandalized by the community. Certain cultures retain similar beliefs, which is why the veil is so common in certain areas, and not in others. Societal pressures can have a firm hold over people’s everyday lives.

Ahmed’s arguments make the readers question the content of the progress that Western feminism is encouraging. Why should one group decide what classifies as right or wrong? There is constant pressure put on places to be and look exactly like the West, but what does that mean? To industrialize, become unsustainable, and begin destroying the planet? People in the West constantly worry over places not progressing, but what if those places have already found their ultimate, optimal state as a society. Nomadic communities in Africa are seen as “backwards,” but they are maintaining their land, self-sufficient, and are free of health problems such as obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and other illness plaguing the “modern,” Western world. Maybe we should start stop looking for what we can change in these places, and see what we can learn from these societies to improve our own.

The issue of the hijab is an issue parallel to those issues of modernity and progress. Why should the West decide how women should dress and what is suitable? If women in the Middle East feel it is their right to wear the veil, and feel that it is the right decision for them, why should outsiders make such an issue of it? Some people may see the common act of piercing young girls’ ears as oppression, but it is done within our own culture, so there is no issue. People who feel it is wrong should at least seek to understand the cultural meaning and history of the veil before making rash comments about the women who wear it.  Ahmed knows that there is wrong happening in her society, but she makes a clear point that making a difference in the issues of women’s rights should not come through attempts to remove the veil or strip people of their cultural heritage. Ahmed feels that women should be empowered to make their own decisions, and have control over their own lives. Outside “feminists” cannot make any true change, especially without understanding fully the cultural implications of their advocacy.