Objection to Ḥijāb and the Double Standards of Liberals
By: Muhammad Saleem
❖ Criticism of Ḥijāb and the Liberal Hypocrisy
Those who object to the ḥijāb of Muslim women often react with offense when their own attire is questioned. A sincere piece of advice to atheist and liberal women: if you’re truly concerned with Muslim women’s modesty, let your men voice the critique—don’t get personally involved, especially not in front of someone like me. Just as you object to the veils of Muslim women, I find your clothing objectionable too.
❖ Debating Ḥijāb and the Liberal Woman’s Contradictions
Once, I engaged in a conversation with an atheist woman regarding the ḥijāb. I asked her:
“What level of modesty should be observed?”
As expected, she replied, “There should be no ḥijāb at all.”
I explained to her that ḥijāb essentially means a barrier between the human body and other people’s eyes. Upon hearing this, she immediately realized the discussion was now targeting her own clothing choices. She then attempted to divert the topic, insisting on discussing concubines or polygyny.
I responded: “If you want to change the subject, first edit the original post—then we can discuss whatever you like.”
She refused, and ultimately withdrew from the conversation.
❖ How Should Muslims Respond to Objections Against Ḥijāb?
Muslims must remember:
Anyone who objects to ḥijāb is essentially arguing over its degree, not its existence—because no one walks around entirely naked. Those who question Muslim women covering their faces still cover parts of their own bodies.
So if covering the face is “illogical,” then why is covering the private parts considered logical?
❖ Questions for Atheists
◈ Those who believe in only science, what scientific rationale can they provide for covering the private parts?
◈ Who instructed them to wear clothes in the first place?
◈ Muslims have religious and moral reasons for modesty—what basis do atheists have for clothing themselves?
❖ Global Laws and the Reality of Clothing
Every developed country enforces some form of clothing regulations.
No society—whether Muslim or non-Muslim—permits people to roam completely naked.
Even if atheists were to establish their own country, they would still enforce some level of dress code. So if everyone agrees on wearing clothes, then why object to others covering more?
❖ Clothing Is Not Solely for Weather Protection
Some claim that clothing is only worn to protect against climate conditions.
However, even in scorching heat, people still wear at least undergarments.
Even those at the height of indecency—on beaches, for example—still keep some parts covered.
My objection is not to the parts they remove, but to the few garments they still insist on keeping!
If they demand freedom in their dress, they must also respect Muslim women’s freedom to observe ḥijāb.
