5 The Impact of Religious Symbolism in Europe: Wearing the Hijab and Burqha

Introduction

As an example of the relationship between human rights and religion, this chapter outlines how several European countries have tried to integrate headscarf-wearing women into the education and work sector by taking various approaches to Muslim religious practices. In a number of countries, the regulations affecting wearing of the hijab are for- mulated in a way that will also affect turban-wearing Sikh men, or Jews wearing the traditional skullcap, the kippah. Consequently, this chapter should not be seen as dealing exclusively with hijab-related issues, since in some instances a clash between a hijab-wearing woman and state regulations on clothing in the public service do- main has initiated a wider debate about the relation between religious precepts and their effect on public life. It ought to be pointed out that this discussion does not engage with the debate whether or not and in what form Muslim law and custom prescribe the hijab. We accept the wearing of the hijab by a significant percentage of Muslim females as a societal given. e aim is to analyse if and how various countries try to regulate the wearing of religious clothing in situations such as state schools, public service em- ployment, legislatures, etc.

 Of course, the issue of the hijab is not unique. In the s campaigns were mounted in Manchester and other UK cities to allow Sikhs to wear their turbans in the workplace, and only in  did the House of Lords rule that Sikhs were a distinct ethnic group protected under the Race Relations Act. Today all Sikhs in Britain can wear turbans. However, this was not a major issue elsewhere in Europe, since the majority of Sikh im- migrants settled in the UK.  For the purposes of this discussion, the term hijab is defined as consisting of the veil with and without face-covering known from countries of the Arabian peninsula as well as Asia, besides the short headscarf favoured by many observant Islamic Turkish women in Turkey and in Germany. Where there is a specific case involving the Afghanistan-style burqha, this is indicated.  Chapter 5

Motivations for Regulating Religious Clothing

Many religions have laws and traditions prescribing a certain dress code. Sikh men are required to wear a turban; sometimes orthodox Jewish men wear fur hats and black robes; many married Jewish women cover their head with a hat, a wig or a snood; Buddhist monks shave their heads; followers of Krishna wear orange sari- style clothing; Roman Catholic monks and nuns wear habits in either brown, black, blue, white or grey. Many of these items of clothing have become symbols of a par- ticular religion or sect, serving both as a tool for the observation of a religious com- mandment, and as a means for the wearer to demonstrate adherence to a particular group or culture. Items of clothing carry different messages. For example, if a mar- ried Orthodox Jewish woman covers her head, she is signalling, ‘I am an observant Jew and I am married to those who can decipher the code transmitted by the head covering.’ For people familiar with this cultural code, it will imply certain standards of behaviour. For example, it would be out of the question for a religious Jewish man encountering a Jewish woman who has covered her hair to engage in flirting with that woman, or even to offer to shake her hand. In addition to the most obvious, almost symbolic items of clothing that identify their wearers as belonging to a certain group, many faiths and cultures have addi- tional, more subtle dress codes that may be a little more difficult to decode. For ex- ample, both traditional religious Muslim and Jewish women will never be seen in tight-fitting jeans and sleeveless T-shirts, as this clashes with their inherent concept of modesty. ere is also the related but distinct issue of how dress codes become distinctive for non-religious people, forming identity badges that almost become religious in the way that they function. e street clothes of the skaters, for instance, with their baggy jeans, baseball caps and other additions, mark them out as a distinct and separate group. Fashion labels of the latest trendy designers mark out another group, and a plethora of sub-groups can similarly be marked out via different fashions and styles. Perhaps this highlights the common human desire to identify with one another and belong to a group or community. While this might be of interest to sociologists of religion, fashion rarely impacts on issues of human rights, unless, for example, the designer labels are being produced in the sweatshops of the world, so the more afflu- ent can follow a trend at the cost of the plight of thousands elsewhere. Fashion can and does, of course, highlight differences, making those unable to afford the expense envious. en again, the fashion-conscious buy imitations in order to identify with their wealthier contemporaries. e launching in  of the hijab as a fashion ac- cessory, which could neutralise the hijab as an exclusively religious item of clothing, was a fascinating phenomenon. e issue at the heart of the dispute concerning the wearing of religious clothing in state schools in France and other European countries really had little to do with

 Fashions also change incredibly quickly, in comparison with religious dress codes. But perhaps this is partly due to the fact that it is a market driven by economic forces, where- as religion has economics only as one part of its make-up.