The conclusion of a future-oriented report about hijab: There is no choice but tolerance
The conclusion of a future-oriented report about hijab: There is no choice but tolerance. A future-oriented study on the obligation of hijab in Iran, after reviewing the historical course of hijab in terms of customary legislation and examining religious opinions and research conducted on hijab, has concluded that Iranian society has no choice but to move towards greater tolerance and for the government to withdraw from managing the hijab issue.
In this report prepared by the Strategic Studies Group of Miras, it is stated that our address to those compatriots who believe in hijab and enjoining good and forbidding wrong and do not have a heartfelt belief in tolerance is that the lack of tolerance will lead to a negative societal response towards hijab. In other words, the lack of tolerance in practice paves the way for the spread of non-hijab. For effective enjoining good and forbidding wrong, it is suggested that independent cultural and religious activities be conducted with the aim of persuading society.
Based on this research, since 1935, with the enactment of the unveiling law by Reza Shah, the issue of hijab in Iran became political and governmental. From 1941 to 1979, with hijab becoming optional, religious institutions organized cultural activities to promote hijab, which perhaps did not achieve much success overall. After the revolution, the government’s intervention in hijab matters further exacerbated the issue.
Therefore, currently, the issue of hijab, with this background, has largely become a political matter. This situation causes the religious and cultural meaning of hijab to become dimmer and to be affected by political protests. In other words, unveiling is interpreted as opposition to the government, and being veiled is interpreted as support for the government. This damage will lead to a further decrease in adherence to hijab in the long term. The published report from this research points to four possible scenarios facing Iranian policymakers.
From Coexistence to a Smoldering Fire
In the coexistence scenario, society tolerates diverse thoughts and lifestyles, and all currents have representation in the government. The hijab issue is peacefully regulated through people’s representatives and in accordance with the majority opinion of society. Hijab and various forms of dress are accepted within the framework of the law as a personal choice by the people and will not cause division among the people.
In the lineup scenario, people have a very low tolerance threshold for different thoughts, but all currents have their representatives in the country’s governance. Society’s tolerance for diverse thoughts decreases, and tension spreads to the political level. In addition to people’s harsh interactions with each other, the political space will also become a place for confrontation between different currents. The symbolic political and ideological aspect of hijab increases, causing tensions in people’s social relations.
In the hollow fist scenario, society interacts with different segments with tolerance, but the country’s political space is subject to a specific current, and not all viewpoints are reflected in it. Strict laws and punishments are imposed and enforced for violators of the hijab law, but people live together with tolerance and acceptance of diverse lifestyles, and hijab laws lose their legitimacy. Hijab is accepted as an individual choice and does not cause tension and division among people. The distinction between the morality police and veiled women is maintained.
In the smoldering fire scenario, only a specific group of people have representation in governance, and society does not tolerate diversity in thought and lifestyle. A part of society, backed by political power, suppresses another part and enforces its desired laws. A portion of the people who are not represented in the government express part of their anger through harsh interactions with veiled women and religious symbols. The ground is prepared for widespread protests and the emergence of violence.
Scenario Outcomes
The coexistence scenario, provided that society is tolerant and an open political environment is realized, can consider educating the next generation to prevent renewed conflict over the hijab issue. Attention to the next generation is important in all scenarios to prevent renewed conflict, so this important point will not be repeated in the other scenarios.
In the hollow fist scenario, where society is tolerant but a closed political environment leads to confrontation over hijab, the effort of society to remove the government from managing the issue and the central role of society in solving the hijab issue is of greater importance.
In the lineup scenario, where a non-tolerant society engages in widespread conflict in an open political space, the primary priority of civil society activity is to recognize diverse currents.
In the smoldering fire scenario, where society is non-tolerant and part of the people supports the suppression of another group by the government, the first priority is recognizing diverse currents, and in the next stage, the central role of society in solving the hijab issue is important.
Withdrawal of Governance from Managing the Hijab Issue
In this report, suggestions have been made to civil and cultural institutions to reduce further damage to the hijab, including 1. Demanding the maximum withdrawal of governance from managing the hijab issue 2. Recognizing diverse currents.
The continuation of this research, indicating that it seems the different parties in the hijab issue do not have a correct image of each other, states that labeling and incorrect interpretations of the thoughts and motives of different parties in the women’s dress choice issue close the door to dialogue and block the path to thinking about solving the issue. It is crucial to note that the impossibility of formal social and cultural activities for various groups will lead to the expansion of grounds and motivations for the emergence of violence.
It is likely that in the medium term, Iranian society will face a decrease in the choice of traditional hijab as women’s attire. In this situation, propaganda aimed at monopolizing the concept of modesty and chastity within hijab leads to labeling non-hijab groups in society as immodest and unchaste. These insulting labels around the hijab promotion current lead to disgust for hijab, increased tension, and simultaneous damage to the issues of modesty and chastity.
At the end of this report, it is also suggested that proposing tolerance is not to deny enjoining good and forbidding wrong. In proposing tolerance, the heartfelt rank of forbidding wrong for those who believe in the traditional Shia interpretation can be presented, but the negative effects of verbal and practical forbidding wrong on the current hijab issue should be considered.
In this regard, content has been published in Iran Gate.
- Morality Police or Death Chariot
- Hijab Referendum: Yes in Turkey, No in Iran
- Morality Police is Just an Excuse
