(Turin and London) The latest hijab controversy in Europe, the headscarf worn by Muslim women, erupted in late October. Paradoxically, the trigger was an anti-discrimination campaign launched by the Council of Europe.
The Council posted a short video on its social media that included a series of images split in two. One side shows a woman wearing a hijab, the other shows her bare-headed. At the end of the video, the text “beauty is in diversity like freedom is under the hijab” appears, followed by the hashtags #celebratediversity and #JOYinhijab.
The video sparked an uproar in France, where government spokesman Gabriel Attal was quoted by the Financial Times by declaring: “Religious freedom should not be confused with the de facto promotion of a religious symbol. “Mr. Attal qualified the wearing of the hijab of” identity “position” contrary to the freedom of conscience supported by France “. The Secretary of State for Youth and Engagement, Sarah El Haïri, spoke out forcefully against the video and attributed the Council’s decision to withdraw it from circulation. Right-wing politicians like Marine le Pen and Michel Barnier and prominent television pundits have added their voices to criticism of the campaign.
France is not the only European country to want to restrict the wearing of the hijab.
The influx of Muslim immigrants to Europe and the threat of violent Islamist groups have made Muslim minorities a target of hostility and discrimination, and the hijab has become a visual symbol of such tensions.
Of the 27 Member States of the European Union and the United Kingdom, 9 have legal restrictions on the veil; there are legislative proposals to limit the practice in 5 others. In countries without national restrictions, some regions have autonomously decided to ban face covering methods. There are only six countries in the European Union – Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Poland, Portugal and Romania – where there has so far been no public debate on the restrictions against the veil.
Supporters of restrictive measures represent a diverse range of views. Many liberal politicians, loyal to the secular state, view religion as a private matter to be kept out of sight. Some feminists see the headscarf as a symbol of patriarchal or religious oppression against women. But the most vehement supporters of the bans have been right-wing populist politicians, who find it appropriate to hide their xenophobia behind arguments that have broader ideological appeal.
In all of this hype, little account is taken of the perspectives of Muslim women. Sociologists have long predicted that modernization will lead to a decline in religiosity and therefore in the use of religious symbols like the hijab. This prediction has been confirmed in Christian and Muslim societies: as modernization increases, the frequency of wearing the veil generally decreases.
But there is a crucial nuance in the interplay between earlier levels of religiosity and modernization.
For example, among very religious Muslim women, the likelihood of wearing the hijab increases with women’s participation in modern social life, especially if they are young, educated and single.
This seems to be true not only in predominantly Muslim countries, but also in countries where Muslims are in the minority, such as Belgium. The more Muslim women identify as deeply religious members of native Belgians, the more likely they are to wear the hijab. This trend can also be observed in countries where religiosity remains strong. For example, in Indonesia, the number of women who wear the hijab has shown a tendency to increase along with prosperity.
Studies show that most women do not wear the hijab due to pressure from their family or community. In fact, the practice is more prevalent among very religious women who, due to their employment status, education, income and political participation, must be relatively better prepared to withstand family pressure.
The veil appears to be not only an expression of religiosity, but also a strategic decision. Religious women appear to wear the hijab to reconcile their life outside the home with the social norms of their community. Adopting the hijab reassures their communities, showing that their involvement in “riskier” secular lives away from home should not be interpreted as an opportunity to engage in behavior contrary to their religious norms. The hijab then signals the resilient piety of truly religious women against the perils that modernization could cause to their reputation.
This understanding of the veil has implications for cultural policy.
In Europe, the hijab could be a sign not of segregation, but of the integration of Muslims into society.
As very religious Muslim women make more non-Muslim friends and move to neighborhoods where they are in the minority, they may choose to wear the hijab as a way to preserve their pious reputation in the face of modernity. Banning certain forms of veiling would deprive these women of a choice that would allow them more freedom, not less.
If the wearing of the hijab were banned, a woman who wanted to signal her piety and her decision to conform to the norms of her own community would be forced to seek alternatives that could be so burdensome that she would decide to stay at home. This is arguably not the outcome desired by many supporters of the ban.
Everything behind the veil is not to be feared. The Council of Europe slogan is perhaps not so far from the truth, although this may seem surprising to us. There is certainly more “freedom under the hijab” than there would be in its prohibition.
* Diego Gambetta is Emeritus Fellow of Nuffield College, University of Oxford, co-author of the book Engineers of Djihad: The Curious Connection Between Extremism and Education (Princeton University Press, 2016)
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2021