Hillary in Hijab

Were any of you uncomfortable as I was seeing the photo of Hillary Clinton in Pakistan wearing a scarf over her hair? I know given the magnitude of what she has to deal with there, that this a small, possibly trivial issue. But on the other hand, whenever I see an American female official (and this has been true of Democrats and Republicans) in a Muslim country with her head covered, I feel that this is not sending a message of respect for their values but failing to take an opportunity to show ours. It’s one thing to enter a house of worship and abide by the rules of attire. And there are also cultural norms of dress that should be observed anywhere—I don’t think you wear flip-flops to the White House, for example. But why should a non-Muslim woman visiting a Muslim country have to cover her head while going about her business? In Obama’s Cairo speech he explicitly cited his support for the right of women to wear the hijab. But as commentators have pointed out, the real issue is that often women have no right not to wear the hijab. In many Muslim countries women who are not “properly” covered are putting themselves in life-threatening situations. I would much prefer to see our female representatives give the tacit message that it’s a woman’s right to choose whether to cover herself or not .

Tags: head covering, Hijab, hillary clinton in pakistan, Muslim world

Emily Yoffe is Slate's Dear Prudence and Human Guinea Pig (emilyyoffe@hotmail.com)

Comments

When in Rome....

By: jerseygirl | Mon, 11/02/2009 - 12:08

We all, often, make decisions about dress based on the customs of the place we are visiting. I've covered my head in places of worship even though it's not part of my religious tradition; I've worn a conservative bathing suit when visiting a lake in a Central American country where I was told women would not ordinarily wear more revealing bathing suits. That Clinton (or Rice or Albright before her) has an important Cabinet position makes it even more important that she be seen to show awareness of her cultural milieu. I don't think she should need a head scarf for a business meeting, but when visiting public places, some of religious significance, why not?

respect

By: scavenger | Sat, 10/31/2009 - 11:46

According to today's NY Times, Clinton wore the head scarf while visiting a Sufi shrine:

'A senior American official said that when Lt. Gen. Ahmad Shuja Pasha, the director of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency, met her on Thursday evening, he told her that he was touched by photos of her wearing a pale-blue headscarf as she toured a Sufi shrine in Islamabad.'

That sound's like both decency and good diplomacy.

Furthermore, if you'll note the photo of the roundtable with Pakistan tribal officials, the Sec of State is not wearing hijab.

In any case, it's not really about our comfort. Sec Clinton has a job to do; I trust her to work out her own comfort level in going about her work.

catholic

By: GingerB | Fri, 10/30/2009 - 19:18

Would you be saying the same thing if she's gone to the Vatican and worn a head covering?

I thought it was appropriate.

Why should the citizens of another county even listen to you if you aren't at least slightly respectful of their customs? Hopefully Muslim women saw their leader speaking with her on TV and hoped she's making progress.

I don't have a problem with it, really.

By: sugar_k | Fri, 10/30/2009 - 16:24

I don't think many Americans would be impressed if Angela Merkel showed up topless on a beach in the US. For Hillary to appear with her head uncovered in a Muslim country would detract needlessly from the business of diplomacy. She would no more be striking a blow for the American way than Dick Cheney was when he appeared a few years ago, inappropriately, in a big puffy synthetic coat at a European Holocaust memorial service where all the other world leaders were in proper formal dress.

Point disregarded not missed ;-)

By: Peripatetic | Fri, 10/30/2009 - 16:22

You're correct, my comment was for the most part not responsive to the original post because I find the choice for less exalted women of whether to cover to be more interesting. As for HRC, I'll defer to her to manage the image she chooses to project as she conducts high stakes diplomacy.

Hillary has been doing this

By: Giovanna | Fri, 10/30/2009 - 16:04

Hillary has been doing this in her travels since she was First Lady. I think the critics should back off and let her conduct her diplomacy. There's no harm in it, and it helps to establish good rapport, good diplomacy with the countries she visits.

In Pakistan the dupatta is normal everyday wear. It's as regular an accessory in the style there as neck scarves are here, and is by no means considered oppressive of women in any sense. The Taliban burqa‘ or Wahhabi niqab (face-veil) are considered misogynist and religious extremist imports, rejected by the large majority of Pakistanis, but they don't consider those forms of oppression as having anything to do with the dupatta, which is their indigenous, homegrown style. Feminists in Pakistan wear the dupatta. It is not even an issue.

By wearing it, Hillary is graciously helping the cause of good international relations by accommodating local style, instead of stomping in there all arrogant like the Ugly American.

Peripatetic- But that wasn't

By: icpshootyz | Fri, 10/30/2009 - 15:34

Peripatetic-
But that wasn't the case here. This is Hillary Clinton. The highest-ranking female public official in the U.S. She should have not worn the scarf, plain and simple. She is not Muslim. She is not governed by Muslim mores. As an American woman, she should be presenting our version of a woman's liberty, not showing "respect" for their lack of respect. Sure, lower-ranking women who actually live and work in those lands are probably safer abiding by the local customs. But when Hillary visits a foreign land for a brief period of time, she is there solely as an American ambassador of sorts. She should not have worn the scarf.

What Not to Wear

By: Peripatetic | Fri, 10/30/2009 - 14:32

Whether to cover is a more difficult decision for female American officials working in conservative Muslim countries who are not Cabinet-level officials (for them it's simply a PR calculation). It is tempting to bow to local norms to more easily develop fruitful relationships with local officials and to eliminate a potential source of friction. After all our mission is to advance U.S. interests rather than to signal our support for a woman's right to choose (as desirable as that is, it is not at the top of our foreign policy priorities).