One of the characteristics of humans is the ability to think abstractly and use symbolism. Humans encode and mark their thoughts into a framework of verbal, visual, and auditory symbols and use these symbols and signs to convey their intended concepts.

A “symbol” or “icon” within the framework of an object or image, and sometimes even a word or sound, represents a collection of norms and abnormalities, commonalities and differences within a social group and is used as a tool to convey desired concepts.

By seeing or hearing that symbol, the hidden concepts within that symbol are automatically and subconsciously transmitted to the viewer or listener. In other words, symbols serve as references and allusions to concepts that are evoked in the mind of the audience.

Now, the question is whether the Islamic Republic of Iran is a symbol of hijab or hijab is a symbol of the Islamic Republic.

First question: Is the Islamic Republic of Iran a symbol of hijab?

In response to the above question, it must first be clarified what is meant by “hijab” in this question. Depending on our interpretation of hijab in the above question, the answer can be different and even contradictory.

When the topic of hijab is brought up, it actually refers to different phenomena with different meanings that only share a verbal similarity. Traditional hijab, identity hijab, political hijab, religious hijab, color hijab, compulsory hijab, symbolic hijab, and optional hijab, each represent a concept of various forms of women’s clothing that are all called hijab.

In this article, only the duality of optional and mandatory hijab will be discussed. Considering this duality, the term “hijab” in the above question can refer to the traditional clothing commonly worn in Muslim societies as “optional hijab”, or it can refer to the “mandatory” clothing enforced by the Islamic Republic of Iran; these two different and distinct meanings also result in different answers to the question of this article.

A- Hijab refers to the traditional covering custom in Muslim societies.

In different Muslim societies, it is evident that women who adhere to the concept of traditional hijab have differences in their clothing compared to women who do not adhere to hijab. Although these differences and symbols of hijab are not the same in all Muslim societies; for example, the hijab of Muslim women in Turkey is different from Iraq and Lebanon, and from African countries, but the common aspect among all of them is the full coverage of hair and appropriate covering of the rest of the body.

In this article, traditional or religious hijab of Iranian women who believe in hijab and have chosen it as their clothing is not the subject of discussion. Rather, the subject of this article is to examine the common form of “mandatory hijab”.

The veil that became prevalent in Iran after the victory of the February 1979 Revolution, especially in the past three decades and prior to the Mahsa Movement, was imposed and enforced by the government. It was completely different from the common understanding of traditional Muslim veiling.

In this form of hijab, although women wore a headscarf or shawl, parts of their hair were exposed from the front and sides; only a scarf or headscarf covered a portion of their head. Such attire was not considered a traditional or religious hijab in the eyes of traditional Muslim societies. However, women who were forced to wear this type of clothing by the government were not following traditional hijab or commonly accepted religious and legal standards, but rather only adhering to minimal standards of government regulations in order to avoid the consequences of punishment for improper hijab or being unveiled.

The government also tolerated this dress to a certain extent, and if headscarves went back too far or the skirts of mantos became too short, it would confront them.

This attire had no connection to traditional Islamic hijab, rather it was a “imposed” and “tolerated” form of covering.

On one hand, the government imposed this covering on society, and on the other hand, these women also tolerated it not out of religious or traditional belief, but out of necessity.

On the other hand, this covering was also incompatible with religious and legal standards, but the government was forced to settle for these minimums. In other words, society gradually imposed its own criteria on the government, and the government was forced to tolerate these half-closed veils; not because they were in line with their own religious standards, but out of necessity and inability, they settled for minimal standards.

One of the contradictions that the scenes of compulsory hijab in Iran surprised non-Iranian observers was the paradox that existed in this type of imposed hijab. On one hand, all women were veiled in public spaces, but on the other hand, the way of covering their head and body and even their common makeup did not correspond to the hijab in traditional and Islamic societies. For Muslims and even for Westerners who traveled to Iran or saw images of women in Tehran through the media, this type of clothing was a paradox. On one hand, they wore a scarf or headscarf, but on the other hand, this clothing was different from the common standards and symbols of Islamic clothing.

According to the statement of the Vice President of the Association of Importers of Cosmetics and Hygiene Products of Iran, “Data and field research show that we rank first in the world in the consumption of cosmetics.” (1) According to statistics announced by the head of the Food and Drug Organization, “The per capita consumption of cosmetics and hygiene products in Iran is 2.5 times the global average and 1.6 billion dollars of the market for these consumer products in Iran is smuggled and counterfeit.” (2).

In such a space, in the concept of Islamic and traditional hijab, the Islamic Republic was not a symbol of Islamic hijab, but rather veiled women in other countries where hijab was a choice for them – even in secular countries like Turkey – were more of a symbol of traditional Islamic hijab than the Islamic Republic.

B- Hijab in the sense of compulsory covering by the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In the concept of government’s coercion to hijab and its imposition, it seems that before the Mehdi movement, the Islamic Republic was a symbol of such hijab. In other Islamic and non-Islamic countries, the difference between veiled and unveiled women was clear and obvious. Some women in those countries choose to wear hijab and are veiled, while others appear without hijab in society. This very point – the possibility of distinguishing between veiled and unveiled women in other societies – and the impossibility of such distinction in Iran, was a prominent symbol of the public and collective space of the Islamic Republic.

The only country where hijab was mandatory was the Islamic Republic of Iran. Even non-Muslim women from Iranians and non-Iranians were forced to observe this hijab within Iran.

Therefore, this type of imposed and mandatory hijab can be considered as a symbol of the Islamic Republic of Iran and one of its unique characteristics and a symbol of its public space, which distinguishes the Islamic Republic from other Islamic and non-Islamic countries.

Second question: Is hijab a symbol of the Islamic Republic of Iran?

Loyalty to “symbols” is a sign of loyalty to values and ideals within cultural and group cultures, whether in dominant cultures or in marginal subcultures; elevating that symbol, sign, and representation is a sign of belonging to that culture.

As an example, even men’s hairstyles and facial hair can be a symbolic representation of their affiliation with certain cultures or subcultures. In former communist societies, the beard was a symbol. In revolutionary societies, having a beard was also a symbol. In religious societies, having a beard had a different meaning and was still a symbol. These symbols were references to shared concepts in societies and cultures.

Governments, especially those based on ideology, also engage in cultural engineering and use symbols as “symbols” to mark their presence.

The Islamic Republic, like other governments – especially those based on ideology – paid attention to symbols from the beginning. After the victory of the revolution in February 1979, some common symbols, such as wearing a tie and shaving one’s beard, were considered “tyrannical”. The replacement symbols resembled the rulers of the community and imitated their formal and physical appearance. Therefore, growing a beard and wearing a clerical robe became symbols of the revolutionary and Islamic values of the society.

New symbols were established to resemble traditional Muslim women for women as well. The hijab, mantoo, chador, and avoiding makeup in public places became symbols of values and norms of the revolutionary society among women.

“Simplicity of life” and “associating oneself with the family and ancestors of farmers and villagers” were also part of the symbolic values of the revolutionary society. The use of new titles and labels such as “brother” and “sister” even in official titles for high-ranking officials of the government, had been marked as a new “value” symbol.

After a decade since the victory of the February 1979 Revolution, the new revolutionaries who had moved from the “lower class” to the “upper class” of society and tasted the flavor of power and privilege, and had also relocated from the south to the north of the city geographically, could no longer remain bound by the symbolic values and revolutionary ideals of the 1357 revolution.

The redefinition and transformation of “symbols” in the section related to men, in a patriarchal society, was carried out with great speed and rapidity.

In the general culture of society, both among the agents of society and in the public sphere, many of these revolutionary symbols have been forgotten; “simplicity” has been replaced by “ostentatious display”.

In masculine symbols as well, these changes were evident in the shortening of beards and the way of dressing. Titles like “brother” could not express the distinction of the elite; therefore, initially the elite became “Haj Agha” and gradually the words “doctor” and “engineer” replaced those symbols of the early revolutionary values.

The transformation of these symbols, in the above sections, has been so reversed that if at the beginning of the revolution, the President, Prime Minister, and Ministers of the country were also addressed as “brother” in official correspondence and interactions, in recent decades they were not satisfied with their religious titles such as “Hojjat al-Islam” and it was necessary to also include “Doctor”. Words like “Doctor” replaced revolutionary and moral symbols like “brother”.

In the patriarchal society of Iran, the transformation and conversion of “symbols” in the women’s section was done with less haste and gradually. One of the reasons for this, in addition to the patriarchal nature of society, was that the veil of women had become a powerful symbol of Islamic rule. While other symbols could be seen as representative of a “revolutionary” society and could be ignored, the veil of women was also a symbol of “Islam” and could not be easily overlooked.

If passing through other symbols meant transitioning from a “revolutionary society” to a normal society, passing through the symbol of hijab would be seen as transitioning from an “Islamic society” to a normal and customary society.

Therefore, changes related to the symbol of hijab were gradually and peacefully accepted. Scarves were slowly pushed back, mantos were shortened centimeter by centimeter, and make-up became thicker step by step. It was in such conditions that over the past four decades, a type of hijab formed that was imposed and tolerated.

The events of 1401 – which began in the month of Shahrivar with the name of the late Mahsa Amini – were like a leap in the path of progress. These events were an explosion of dissatisfaction, especially regarding women’s rights and in protest against mandatory hijab. The government, which until then either did not hear the voices of this dissatisfaction or ignored them, suddenly faced a wave of these protests, symbolized by the mandatory hijab. It seems that women suddenly wanted to remind the male-dominated society that just as you change your symbols, we also demand a change in symbols related to ourselves.

In the early years, the rulers of the Islamic Republic interpreted the symbol of the hijab as a symbol of “Islamism”. Choosing other symbols was seen as a symbol of desirable values in Islamic society, requiring skill and efficiency in government and the removal of government monopolies. For example, symbolizing the promised justice in Islamic society, symbolizing the promised welfare, political and social equality of citizens in a promised Islamic society, which was promised and promised for years, required efficiency and selflessness from the government and the removal of monopolies.

The government could not present its achievements in individual, social, economic, and judicial justice as a symbol of the Islamic Republic to its traditional supporters. These justices were incompatible with the privileges and benefits that the government and its supporters enjoyed. However, the government could use the veil as a symbol, by introducing unveiled women as synonymous with indecency and immorality, to portray itself as the leader in promoting the veil and fighting against immorality.

Corruption, manipulation of beauty and exploitation of large economic, social, and political rents, along with the lack of efficiency and wisdom in governance, have joined hands for the government to believe that it can use the “Islamic veil” as a meaningless symbol of the Islamic Republic for public display.

The aggressive imposition of the “mandatory hijab” and its portrayal as a “matter of honor” and a “red line” was one of the mistakes that the Islamic Republic’s government had made in its early years of coming to power; now this symbolism has turned into a trap for this regime. In fact, what the government had turned into its own Islamic symbol in order to simplify the issue, it now sees as its own Achilles’ heel; on one hand, it cannot escape this symbol, and on the other hand, the society does not intend to return to the past.

In such conditions, in order to overcome these crises, wise and capable governments strive to align themselves with the desires of society and even with the future outlook of that society. However, in weak and ineffective governments, lack of self-confidence leads to insistence on claiming moral values, which will have a negative impact on the government.

Notes:

1- Iran ranks first in consumption of cosmetics, according to the website of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, 12 Ordibehesht 1401 (May 2, 2022).

2- The per capita consumption of cosmetics in Iran is 2.5 times the global average, IRNA, 5 December 2019.

3- For further study, see: Other notes by the author on the subject of hijab.

• “Unveiling from Hijab, Opponents of Mandatory Hijab in Religious Criticism Bi-Monthly Journal”

  Number 9.

  Autumn and winter of 1401.

• “Recognized veil, religious veil, political veil, compulsory veil”, Peace Line monthly magazine.

  Ninth year: Number 88.

  “September 2018, pp. 24-28.”

• Why did hijab become a matter of honor in the Islamic Republic of Iran?

  Zeytoon Website

  “18 Bahman month 1396.”

• Ayatollah Montazeri: Compulsion to Hijab, Enjoining Good and Forbidding Evil, Jares Website, 8 November 2014.

• “Ayatollah Khamenei and the campaign against compulsory hijab”, Jares website, 28 Mehr 1391 (October 19, 2012).