Hypocrisy: Western Perceptions of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” Movement in Iran

On September 16, 2022, Mahsa

Amini died under suspicious circumstances in a hospital in Iran after being detained by morality police. It was later revealed that she was severely beaten and tortured at the hands of these police, and her subsequent injuries led to her death. What was the cause of her arrest? She was arrested for ‘improperly’ wearing the hijab.

In Iran, it is mandated that all women have to wear the hijab, a concept known as the compulsory hijab. No woman is able to choose under what circumstances they want to wear a hijab or whether they even want to wear a hijab at all. Such compulsion, of course, is an attack on the rights and autonomy of women. Iran erupted in protest after the death of Mahsa Amini because her death became clear evidence that the compulsory hijab rule being mandated by the morality police was leading to the subjugation and brutalization of women around the country. “Woman, life, freedom” became the chant heard around the world, calling for freedom of choice for women everywhere.

What is interesting about the worldwide response to the movement is that many other countries, Western and non-Western alike, embraced the movement while denying freedom of choice to their own women.

This was a phenomenon heavily criticized by Muslim hijabi women worldwide who were being denied their choice to wear the hijab.

Muslim hijabi women in India, for example, found it quite hypocritical when there was worldwide response to the movement in Iran, but no response near that level to the hijab bans occurring in their own country. The main motivator for protests in Iran is not about the hijab itself, many women say. The main motivator is the freedom of women to wear or not wear whatever they may please. And if that is the main motivator for the movement, then supporters should be equally passionate about preserving freedom of choice in India, where Muslim hijabi women face discrimination and hijab bans.

A similar sense of hypocrisy exists in France, a country well known for its persecution of Muslim women. Muslim women face obstacles in schools, public beaches, and even political campaigns in France if they choose to wear a hijab. However, many famous French people did not post about these obstacles being instigated in their country. They did post, though, when the “woman, life, freedom” movement began in Iran, passionately stating that they did not condone the systemic oppression of women.

Muslim women have their autonomy violated in France every day when they choose to keep the hijab on, but many French public figures only started talking about the oppression of women when it concerned being able to take the hijab off. This hypocrisy comes down to one simple fact: many countries still subscribe to a deeply Western understanding of feminism that fails to see how both the nonconsensual obligation of certain clothing and the nonconsensual ban of certain clothing threaten the freedom and autonomy of women around the world. This understanding of feminism is also deeply rooted in racism and Islamophobia.

The hijab is still mainly viewed as a tool of subjugation and religious oppression, forced upon women and hindering their ability to liberate themselves. This understanding of the hijab leaves no space for Muslim women who find their hijab to be an integral and liberating part of their identity. Islam is still widely viewed as a religion of violence and hatred that threatens the preservation of human rights. This understanding of Islam leaves no space for thousands of Muslims worldwide who find their religion to be a source of comfort, safety, community, and connection. It also deeply skews the meaning of Islam and paints the religion in a way that is inaccurate to its actual ideals and practices. Moreover, it is an understanding that is not rooted in fact.

When these understandings of the hijab and Islam became popularized around the world, they limited the scope of feminism and the fight for equal rights for women. This is the dilemma that the hypocrisy of Western perceptions of the “woman, life, freedom” movement stems from. When the “woman, life, freedom” movement is understood as a movement of liberation from the hijab, its entire purpose is diminished. In Iran, the hijab is utilized by a male-dominated government as a tool to control women. The “woman, life, freedom” movement is about ending that control of women and giving them the choice to wear or not wear hijab. As Basma Khalifa says:

“What women in Iran are fighting for shouldn’t be downplayed into a conversation about the enforcement of the hijab. It’s in fact a much larger conversation about the generational brainwashing that has occurred at the hands of Islamic fundamentalist men who want to use religion to impose order.”

Similarly, in India, a hijab ban is a form of social control also used to subjugate women. The government in India is currently quite maledominated and Hindu nationalist, meaning that many government officials believe that all of India should be led by Hindu faith and culture, and nothing else.

Such an ideology leaves no room for separation between religion and government, and also erases the several other religions practiced in India, one of which is Islam. It does leave room for people in power to start banning any practices that divert from Hindu nationalism, such as wearing the hijab freely. And so hijab bans in India are used to oppress Muslim people as a whole and specifically oppress Muslim women, making them a tool of the patriarchy and a threat to the same freedom of choice that protesters in Iran are fighting for.

Yet conversations in the West about bodily autonomy often center around policies such as the compulsory hijab in Iran, but rarely include hijab bans being used to control women in places such as India and France.

For feminism in the West to advance, there has to be a restructuring of our understanding of women’s liberation. Our understanding of liberation must be extended to women who choose to dress more modestly as a form of their own empowerment just as much as it is extended to women who choose to dress less modestly as a form of their own empowerment.

For many Muslim women, choosing to wear the hijab can be a step towards their own spiritual empowerment that greatly benefits their sense of self and identity. The hijab can enrich their lives and bring them great joy and security. Feminism has to include these women, or it is not feminism at all. Feminism includes condemning oppression that forces women to cover up against their will and oppression that forces women to show their skin against their will. We cannot let a Western, racist, and Islamophobic understanding of liberation hinder our ability to create a more just and equitable world where women of all backgrounds have the ability to experience their lives the way they wish to. We must speak as passionately about India and France and all the other countries that hinder a Muslim woman’s ability to choose her path in life as we do about Iran, where women are also prohibited from choosing their path in life.

For if we are to speak against oppression, we must speak against it in all its ugly forms.