Women’s clothing: Don’t fight oppression with oppression

France’s Union for Popular Movement (UMP) – which, when previously led by Nicolas Sarkozy banned the burqa in France – sparked controversy recently as female British MPs criticized the party over a sexism row. Accusations of sexism came after the centre-right party were seen in French Parliament hooting and crying “phwoar”at minister Cecile Duflot who was wearing a blue floral-print dress.

It was around the time of the burqa ban I began to delve into the reasons of why Muslim women dress the way they do. As a Hindu woman, I never had a true understanding of why these women chose to cover themselves. I concluded it to be for conservative religious beliefs, respected that and carried on with my own life.

Images of a 6ft supermodel with perfect bone structures, prominent assets and flawless skin is the depiction of what a woman should be, or at least encouraged to be by womens lifestyle magazines.

The “mannequines” as author Jean Kilbourne defines them, are constantly propagated through the media. Regurgitated on many media platforms they have the most profound impact on the socialisation of young boys and girls. Beautiful women with silky hair are plastered upon billboards, magazines and the internet. It is almost impossible to escape. But alongside conformity to this conventional beauty of these women there is no individualism, personality or signs of intelligence. And if there is, it is not deemed significant enough to advertise alongsides their body. Women are turning to extreme lengths to manipulate their faces and bodies, some even going as far as to have surgery such as bum implants.

Because these attitudes have formed in our subconscious and have become “the norm” there is a failure to recognize it as a form of oppression. The burqa on the other hand becomes oppressive only when a woman is forced to wear it. Why is not then deemed oppressive when women are objectified and face so many pressures to look aesthetically pleasing to benefit men?

Writer Ariel Levy suggests that we as women must be careful not to buy in to the sexualisation of women. In her book “Female Chauvinist Pig: Women and the rise of Raunch Culture” Levy points out “it no longer makes sense to blame men”. It is our responsibility as women to be conscious and realise that self-objectifying ourselves is not a form of female empowerment.

In a world that sexualises women in the media I now see my earlier perception of the burqa being “conservative” as not entirely accurate. The dominant reason I see for the practice is the women’s wish to preserve herself guided by the Quran under the concept of modesty. If anything, the way Muslim women dress can be liberating because it directly challenges the conventional ideology of beauty that pressurises women into manipulating the way they look. On encounters, it allows a woman to display her true inner beauty through her personality and intellect.

Men too have an equal role in respecting women. “Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and be modest. That is purer for them.” – Quran 24:29. Men must refrain from being drawn to the sexualisation of women. If they see women as sexual objects in their path, they must lower gaze so they do not continue to see it.

The sexualisation of women in advertising reduces them to objects and de-emphasises individuality. Muslim dress – so often referred to as oppressive – can challenge this oppression, especially if they push for their intellectual voices to be heard.  It invokes a reminder that women are intelligent beings who should progress due to their merit, not their appearance.

The recent rejection of Aishwarya Rai’s weight gain after giving birth further exemplifies how far the idolisation of conventional beauty has come. Gaining weight after birth is a natural process, if we cannot embrace celebrities during motherhood, what can we embrace? Commentators said: “She needs to learn from people like Victoria Beckham who are back to size zero weeks after their delivery.” Do people genuinely believe that getting back to size zero should be the priority of a woman who has just entered motherhood?” Giving birth is one of the most beautiful things a woman can be part of, yet many despise the natural processes that come with it.

It is not a new argument that there is too much attention focussed on a woman’s body and the clothes she wears. This remains the case in the celebrity world, political world and the world of every woman. Sarkozy claimed the veil reduces women to “servitude and undermined their dignity” but can the same can not be said in regards to the way Duflot was treated in parliament?

In an interview with Le Figaro, Patrick Balkany, MP for Union for a Popular Movement (UPM) said: “If she didn’t want us to take an interest in her then she shouldn’t’ve changed her look. [Duflot] put on that dress so we wouldn’t listen to what she was saying.”

The hoots and cries over her blue floral-print dress gives the impression that the dress was to serve them. It undermines her dignity as the dress becomes a distraction over what she has to say.

Ultimately it is not the item of clothing itself that defines how liberated a woman is but her right to chose. What she wears should never be dictated by men or due to pressures from the world around her. Blaming an item of clothing and banning it is illogical; like trying to fight oppression with oppression. Within this right should be the ability for her to be perceived as a person, rather than an object that is defined by whether she choses to wear a burqa – or a blue-floral print dress.

Recent Posts on Notebook

• The Road to the Ultra-Trail du Mont Blanc - Majorca 70.3 Ironman
• The Retail Ready People project means the future of the high street is in your hands
• Don't get mad about Amazon and make the right ethical choice
• Chagos: Conservationists are swimming in murky waters
• Justin Webb on the medical advances in tackling heart disease

• Louise Andino

  Great article, read Ryan Rappas article, on the women in Afghanistan.

• mwrkhan

  Far, far more acceptable, if that is how you wish to label it, than the grotesque bigotry espoused by islam.

• Newsbot9

  Bigotry is bigotry. You can’t breed tolerance and freedom by demanding the right to control something as basic as what people wear.

• nazia jassim

  I’m a Muslim woman in my early twenties who decided to take up the burkha a a few years ago. As a middle class citizen who travels using public transportation and interacts with a lot of people every day, I could feel the difference the burkha made. There was a remarkable reduction in the number of leers and catcalls I used to face while commuting. The burkha didn’t hold me back as I received a Masters degree and employment, so I honestly can’t understand how people remain adamant to call it a symbol of oppression. Women wearing headscarves are actually a global inter-religious phenomenon. Orthodox Jews, orthodox Sikhs, The Amish, Druze, Zoroastrian, Jain Nuns, Taoist Nuns… the list goes on.

  If people refuse to accept a woman’s choice to wear hijab for practical reasons, they should just accept her choice to do so out of her commitment to God. No one questions a nun who walks around in a habit. The reason Muslim women are singled out is because the concept of “women dedicated to God” doesn’t exist in Islam- all practicing Muslims consider themselves dedicated to God on a daily basis. I think the hardest concept for most people to grasp is that a set of people in the 21st century can hang on to an Orthodox set of beliefs and still stay up- to-date in technology.

  As for men feeling offended that female strangers choose to cover up in front of them, I mean, come on. That isn’t a sensible reason to attack a woman’s choice to cover up. Yeah, most educated men are well-mannered and don’t objectify all women they lay their eyes upon. But the percentage of men who DO can make a woman’s life a living hell. Personally, I don’t care if I offend ten men who see me in hijab as long as I shielded myself from even one lecher. And again, it’s only worn in front of male strangers. Not in front of husbands, brothers, uncles,grandfathers, father-in-laws and other women. If only male strangers lose out on the chance of seeing a woman’s curves and hair, while the people who matter to her have every right to admire her beauty, I really can’t comprehend how people still choose to take such a big stand against this practice. Frankly, I don’t think men should even have any say in this matter. And the fact that most so-called ‘forward-thinking’ MEN are against it only reinforces the notion that the hijab/burkha do the job their meant to do.

  The hijab and burkha, as I see it, are beautiful concepts. They give me a sense of comfort, higher esteem, respect and the satisfaction of not having to conform to social norms of dressing and society’s idea of fashion and beauty. It’s frustrating to have to repeatedly defend it to ignorant bigots.

  And, there is no compulsion in religion. If the burkha/headscarf is forced, it’s a regional/cultural thing. Not Islamic. If people are bent on criticizing something as simple as this instead of concentrating on actual crimes against women such as sexual harassment and rape, this is what is wrong with the world.

• nazia jassim

  Why does Saudi Arabia always get dragged into these debates? Unlike most ”free” nations which criticize women for wearing the burkha, Saudi Arabia does not claim to be a free country. Nor can it be used as example to a judge Islam. There are millions of Muslim women in all parts of the world, some who chose to cover up and some who do not. The burkha is just a piece of cloth, a cloak women wear when they step out of the homes. They are free to express their individuality by dressing however they wish to, under the burkha, and to uncloak in front of only the people who matter to them (close male relatives and female friends). I honestly don’t understand why people who don’t wear it choose to make it their business.

• juliarosemary

  In my area I see a burqa or niqab almost every day. Perhaps its all one woman and she goes out a lot.To call someone a racist is the last resort of the person who has no rational arguments left,and what do you mean sub-culture? I am English and my culture is that of Western civilization. I repeat ,it is very unlikely these women are making their own decisions. There is also the considerable health risk. Sunshine on the skin is nescessary to produce Vitamin D,the lack of which can lead to osteoporosis,arthritis, tuberculosis and cancer. In traditional Middle East societies,extended families live in large houses with internal courtyards open to the sky,so the women can be unveiled in these areas and get some sun. These UK Moslems probably live in small flats,especially in London. This is a horrific life,worse than a prisoners. No,I dont believe it is a valid choice in a civilized country.

• Newsbot9

  Right – as you admit you’re trying to launch a purge because you see what is probably a small handful of people in the entire area who have made a choice which does not fit your narrow-minded “acceptably” criteria. Of course you want to remove them all from existence.

  Of course you can’t stand the truth – You have to make up excuses why simple, accurate and descriptive phrases which fit your conduct can’t be used.

  You’re a typical right wing fanatic, who opposes the basis of this country’s society. Your kind of hatred most certainly has it’s own sub-culture, as divorced from the rest of society as any of the communities which you terrorise into reacting in self-defence.

  (That you maunder about vitamin D, when it’s an easy issue to compensate for, shows how far you’ll reach to justify your bigotry.)

• juliarosemary

  This is all brainwashed rubbish. I do not support any right-wing organization,or terrorize anybody. I was born and have always lived in London,and I object to parts of it resembling souks.It is repulsive. Most Moslems would say there is no need to wear the niqab,so why are these women wearing it? Nobody has yet given a single valid reason why this garment is worn,though of course the real reason is to make women invisible except to the men who think they own them. As for the health risk ,are you saying that that doesnt matter? Sunshine is the main source of Vitamin D,you cannot substitute it fully .I dont feel hatred towards these women ,they are pitiful.

• juliarosemary

  I agree that many young women are dressed immodestly inthe evenings,but they are the minority and most older people disaprove. This is probably the folly of youth and most will grow out of it,the very young tend to be easily influenced by the media etc. That is reason to go to the other extreme and have women entombed in black cloth and looking like Egyptian mummies. That is just cruel. Youth and beauty should be visible and celebrated,though of course that is not the most important thing. These clothes certainly are demeaning to women. They give out the message that they are invisible,not to be seen or heard in the public arena, merely domestic creatures,whose role is to breed numerous children,nothing else.

• Newsbot9

  Yes, it is all brainwashed rubbish you’re posting.

  And I see, you’re FAR right and don’t see you’re doing anything wrong, my bad. And you object to seeing anyone from another culture, right.

  A single valid reason? It’s called freedom of choice, what you hate so much. You’re the very sort of person you supposedly decry.

  And of course you can take supplement for vitamin D, it’s a complete non-issue back in the real world. And I see, you just want to slaughter them out of PITY. Makes it so much bette…wait, no, it doesn’t.

  So sorry not everyone is a skinhead.