CAIRO: Every now and then news comes along that a government outside the Middle East decides to ban the hijab (Islamic veil) in some form or another. Protesting such decisions on the streets in Middle Eastern cities has become a regular reaction to such news.
Gradually, the anger over the hijab ban has grown to include a myriad of issues. Throughout the demonstrations, newspaper editorials and other forms of protest, participants often focus on the widening gap between the Muslim, or the Middle Eastern culture, and the West. The clash of civilizations becomes a too-familiar word, used in almost every argument.
But before these demonstrators start attacking the enemies of Islam or express their anger over the double standards by which the West deals with freedom, they should take a closer look at their own region.
Before taking the hijab ban as a symbol of a clash of civilizations, Egyptian protestors should re-examine the local status quo regarding the hijab. Are they in a position to hold the banner that calls for the freedom of expressing and practicing religion?
There is an obvious contradiction between the way we, Egyptians, criticize the West for their double standards and our continuous social and official intolerance toward a handful of lesser-known beliefs.
Al-Azhar officials are lashing out at a recent court ruling recognizing the Baha’i faith as a valid religion, through which legal documentation is permissible. It is still early to determine the society s stance in this case but following in the footsteps of their religious leaders won t be surprising.
As for the administrative aspect, there are plenty of reports of discrimination against converts. They are often denied their legal papers, although many have managed to acquire court rulings in their favor.
But the most obvious contradiction is between how the country, as a society and as a government, features discrimination against the hijab and how its citizens only protest the policies of other countries.
On the outside, Egypt seems to be a society that strongly supports the veil – what other proof than the millions of veiled women in the streets, buses, metros, schools and even the business sector?
The picture, however, is different from the reality some of these women live. Besides the various unwritten anti-hijab rules (women in hijab are not eligible to be admitted to certain places and are denied certain jobs), there is a wide social aversion to the veil.
Women who wear the veil are oppressed, ignorant, uneducated and uncultured. They have a tendency to lean toward fanaticism – many would have more than one argument to support this stereotype, and most of them act accordingly.
Numerous companies refuse to hire veiled women, hotels don t put them on their front desks and some restaurants refuse to host or serve veiled women – some may permit the hijab but wouldn t tolerate the abaya (long loose gown) or niqab (face veil).
Representatives of these administrations casually justify their stance by claiming that their visitors feel intimidated, and sometimes even disgusted, with the presence of veiled women. Preserving the venue s image is of course mentioned as the main concern.
This, however, is not isolated to the private sector; unwritten rules banning the hijab in certain state-run offices have recently come under the spotlight.
Throughout the past few years, about a dozen state TV anchorwomen were fired or were moved to off camera jobs after donning the hijab. The most fortunate received promises to host religious or family oriented shows.
Even with a court order backing their right to return to their pre-hijab posts, a handful of these women were still denied their old jobs.
A previous belief that these women are usually incompetent and the veil is only used as a considerate excuse was refuted following several first-hand encounters, including a meeting with the editor of one of the leading national newspapers.
The editor wasn t only surprised that two American University graduates, highly recommended by a journalism professor, were veiled but he made no effort to conceal or justify his astonishment. After numerous accusations that the women are either uncultured or had links with terrorist groups, the editor of course denied the women jobs, and the accompanying colleague, who defended their right of religious choice, was denied the job previously promised.
Again, this discourse in professional life, which limits opportunity for veiled women to blend in their societies, stems from a deep-rooted belief that generally patronizes the hijab.
This is a culture that is still condescending toward veiled women whether on the grounds of inferiority of social and economic class or intellectual mediocrity. And until Egyptians face up to such stereotypes or recognize its existence, at the very least, they shouldn t be protesting against the decision to ban a veiled young woman from public schools in France, or elsewhere.
