Abstract
Veiling is one of the sources of seclusion of women from and within society. Ghūnghat (avagunṭhana, purdāh) or veiling is primarily associated with covering one’s face which performs various functions. The rationale for veiling could be that it becomes a source of refuge to women from the gaze of others, sometimes providing them with a place of their own, without any interference from others, maintains their respectability and mān or izzat (honour), and becomes a sign of their modesty in society. On the other hand, on analysis, it turns out to be a source of concealment of one’s identity, suppression of one’s sexuality, and a life without any agency. This paper, in the context of the dominant caste of the North Indian Hindu community, will bring out the cultural, social, and gendered aspects of the practice of veiling to show how the acceptance and deference to this practice is the byproduct of women’s conditioning in a patriarchal society. By bringing in the physical and symbolic aspects of veiling, this paper attempts to show how this discussion is significant for the attainment of a ‘good quality of life’ as mentioned by Martha Nussbaum and to come out of the state of an internalised sense of oppression.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
This paper is philosophical in nature. For readers interested in getting the data, some references have been mentioned.
Notes
For a detailed discussion and exposition of these capabilities, refer to Nussbaum’s article ‘Women and the Cultural Universals’ (2000: pp. 210–212).
First World feminist thinkers have been criticised for generalising the problems of all women and trying to find solutions to those problems from their situatedness which is very different from that of the Third World women. In this reference, the views of Narayan (1997), Talpad Mohanty (2003), Bilimoria & Rayner (2024) could be helpful in understanding this issue in detail.
Isha Mathur has clarified: ‘While the ghoonghat is an individual veil, purdāh implies physical demarcation of areas specific for women by using screens, curtains, and even walls’ (2018: p. 172).
There is a huge literature on the practice of veiling in the Muslim community. As veiling has been considered to be an essential part of Muslim women’s existence and identity, it has been discussed in detail by various scholars. This discussion contains the issues of freedom to choose, religious association, and the politics of the veil in the context of the West vs East, Christianity vs Islam, secularism vs religious fundamentalism, fashion vs faith, etc. Major works on these issues include Lila Abu Lughod (1986, 2002), Mernissi (1991a, 1991b), Amina Wadud (1999), Hanna Papanek and G. Minault (1982), Hanna Papanek (1971), Nanda (1990), Ahmed (1992, 2011), Scott (2007), Tarlo (2010), Afshar (1998), Hoodfar (1993), Mahmood (2001), Moghissi (1999), Najmabadi (2000), Brijbhushan (1980), Jeffery (2000), and Cooke (2001).
This discussion is limited to the two-gender society for maintaining the simplicity of the argument.
Various thinkers have traced the practice of veiling in various areas of North India; for example, Prem Chowdhry (2009) has presented a detailed study on the condition of women in Rural Haryana, Janaki Abraham (2010) has put forth the case of women in Bikaner, Veena Das (2000) has shown the condition of women in Panjab, Isha Mathur (2018) has dealt with the case of women in Maharashtra, Tulsi Patel (1987) has done it for women in Rajasthan, and Ursula Sharma (1978) has presented an in-depth study of the condition of women in Ghanyari. All these studies show some differences in the way veiling is practised; however, the reason behind the practice and implication of it is more or less the same.
Prem Chowdhry (2009) has discussed about this aspect in her work Contentious Marriages, Eloping Couples: Gender, Caste, and Patriarchy in Northern India.
The utilization of Urdu terms is prevalent in Hindi-speaking areas. While expressions like mān have been historically employed for the same concept, we will adopt terms such as izzat and other Urdu terminology in this paper. These words have been emphasized by the majority of scholars researching this topic, and we aim to maintain consistency with existing discourse.
While the argument suggests that veiling may be intended to shield women from the scrutiny of others, it does not negate the unfortunate reality that veiled women can still experience sexual objectification and assault. The act of wearing a veil does not provide a foolproof safeguard against sexual or physical harassment. Veiling may propagate the idea that certain men are responsible for safeguarding their wives and have ownership over their bodies, yet it’s important to acknowledge that these same men can sometimes be the perpetrators of harm against the women they are meant to protect. The male gaze could easily breach the barrier imposed by the veil owing to the unequal power dynamics that exist between men and women.
The extent of women’s curtailed and controlled existence could be understood by looking at what is defined as a transgression of societal and cultural norms. It could include being seen or heard by others, being admired by some other men, laughing or singing out loud, going out without being escorted by someone, or having physical or emotional attachment with someone other than the husband.
Mulvey has presented these views in a psychoanalytic reading of women in a patriarchal society, where the unconscious of patriarchy determines every aspect of our lives. Basing her theory on Sigmund Freud’s, she argues how the phallus (the male sexual organ) becomes the centre of everything and women, being castrated (not having the phallus), bear the burden of that lack.
Supporting this argument, Altekar says, ‘We must remember that women have done greater service to religion than men by preserving the old religious tradition, moral fervour and spiritual vein in Hindu society’ (2016: p. 211).
Glorification of Roop Kanwar’s being satī is the case in point. Madhu Kishwar and Ruth Vanita in their article ‘The Burning of Roop Kanwar’ present the difference between the deaths of many women due to various reasons and the death of Roop Kanwar. Whereas the former is considered regrettable, is disapproved by public, and hence takes place in a secret manner (like murdering a woman for dowry), the latter is conducted with public approval and applause of the local community. They lament, ‘If the widespread implicit acceptance of wife murder in our society today expresses the low value set on women’s lives, the public burning to death of a woman is an open endorsement of that devaluation’ (1988: p. 59). There is another side to this incident and the context surroundingʼ satī’ (see Bilimoria & Sharma, 2000).
According to various feminist epistemologists, the people from the oppressed groups do possess additional knowledge not available to the oppressors, and that is that apart from knowing the world and realities of the oppressors, they are also aware of their own oppressed realities which remains unknown to the oppressors as they never participate in the lives of these oppressed people. This additional knowledge of the oppressed group is named ‘epistemic privilege’. To read about the nuances of this notion, one can refer to the works of Spivak (2010), Fricker (1999), and Chakravarti (2018).
Lila Abu-Lughod discusses this point in her paper ‘Do Muslim Women Need Saving?’ on how women in the USA are also controlled and their choices are guided by the sense of fashion created by the market or peer pressure (Abu-Lughod, 2002: p. 786).
References
Abraham, J. (2010). Veiling and the production of gender and space in a town in North India: A critique of the public/private dichotomy. Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 17(2), 191–222.
Abu-Lughod, L. (1986). Veiled sentiments: Honour and poetry in a Bedouin society. University of California Press.
Abu-Lughod, L. (2002). Do Muslim women really need saving? Anthropological reflections on cultural relativism and its others. American Anthropologists, 104(3), 783–790.
Afshar, H. (1998). Islam and feminisms. Macmillan.
Ahmed, L. (1992). Women and gender in Islam. Yale University.
Ahmed, L. (2011). A quiet revolution: The veil’s resurgence, from the Middle East to America. Yale University Press.
Altekar, A. S. (2016). The position of women in Hindu civilization: From prehistoric times to the present day. 11th Reprint (2nd ed.). Motilal Banarasidass Publishers Private Limited.
Bilimoria, P., & Sharma, R. (2000). Where silence burns: Sati (‘suttee’) in India, Mary Daly’s gyocritique, and resistant spirituality. In M. Frye & S. Hoagland (Eds.), Feminist interpretations of Mary Daly living canons series (pp. 322–348). Penn State University Press.
Bilimoria, P., & Rayner, A. (2024). Introduction: Practical Indian ethics in the global cosmopolis. In P. Bilimoria & A. Rayner (Eds.), The Routledge companion to Indian ethics: Women, justice, bioethics and ecology. Routledge.
Brijbhushan, J. (1980). Muslim women in purdah and out of it. Vikas Publishing House.
Chakravarti, U. (2018). Gendering caste: Through a feminist lens. Sage.
Chowdhry, P. (1993). Persistence of a custom: Cultural centrality of Ghunghat. Social Scientist, 21(9/11), 91–112.
Chowdhry, P. (2009). Contentious marriages, eloping couples: Gender, caste, and patriarchy in Northern India. Oxford University Press.
Cooke, M. (2001). Women claim Islam. Routledge.
Das, V. (2000). Masks and faces: An essay on Punjabi Kinship. In P. Uberoi (Ed.), Family, kinship and marriage in India, 4th impression (pp. 198–224). Oxford University Press.
de Beauvoir, S. ([1949] 2010). The second sex. Trans. Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier. Vintage.
Devi, L., & Kaur, M. (2019). Purdah or Ghunghat, a powerful means to control women: A study of rural Muslim and non-Muslim women in Western Uttar Pradesh, India. Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 26(3), 336–349.
Foucault, M. (1984). Nietzsche, genealogy, history. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), The Foucault reader (pp. 76–100). Pantheon Books.
Fricker, M. (1999). Epistemic oppression and epistemic privilege. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 29, 191–210.
Guenther, L. (2001). Shame and the temporality of social life. Continental Philosophy Review, 44(1), 23–39 Accessed on 02/03/2022. https://www.academia.edu/438931/Shame_and_the_Temporality_of_Social_Life
Harlan, L., & Courtright, P. B. (Eds.). (1995). From the margins of Hindu marriage: Essays on gender, religion and culture. Oxford University Press.
Hoodfar, H. (1993). The veil in their minds and on our heads: The persistence of colonial images of Muslim women. Resources for Feminist Research, 22(3–4), 5–18.
Jeffery, P. (2000). Frogs in a well Indian women in purdah. Manohar Publishers & Distributors.
Kakar, S. (2012). The inner world: A psychological study of childhood and society in India (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Kishwar, M., & Vanita, R. (1988). The burning of Roop Kanwar. Race & Class, 30(1), 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/030639688803000104
Kishwar, M., & Vanita, R. (2008). Initiatives against dowry deaths. In M. E. John (Ed.), Women’s studies in India: A reader (pp. 42–45). Penguin Books.
Lewis, H. B. (1971). Shame and guilt in neurosis. International Universities Press.
Mahmood, S. (2001). Feminist theory, embodiment, and the docile agent: Some reflections on the Egyptian Islamic revival. Cultural Anthropology, 16(2), 202–235.
Mathur, I. (2018). From Ghūnghat to de Beauvoir: Finding a feminist voice through ethnography. Journal of Big History, 3(1), 165–178. https://doi.org/10.22339/jbh.v3i1.3180
Menon, R., & Bhasin, K. (2008). August anarchy. In M. E. John (Ed.), Women’s studies in India: A reader (pp. 149–156). Penguin Books.
Mernissi, F. (1991a). The veil and the male elite: A feminist interpretation of women’s rights in Islam. Perseus Books.
Mernissi, F. (1991b). Women and Islam: An historical and theological enquiry. Basil Blackwell.
Moghissi, H. (1999). Feminism and Islamic fundamentalism. Zed Books.
Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema. Screen, 16(3), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1093/screen/16.3.6
Najmabadi, A. (2000). (Un)Veiling feminism. Social Text, 64, 29–15.
Nanda, B. (1990). Indian women: From purdah to modernity. Radiant Publishers.
Narayan, U. (1997). Dislocating cultures. Routledge.
Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and the cultural universals. In M. Baghramian & A. Ingram (Eds.), Pluralism: The philosophy and politics of political diversity (pp. 197–227). Routledge.
Papanek, H. (1971). Purdah in Pakistan: Seclusion and modern occupations for women. Journal of Marriage and Family, Sexism in Family Studies, 33(3), 517–530.
Papanek, H., & Minault, G. (Eds.). (1982). Separate world: Studies of purdah in South Asia. Columbus South Asia Books.
Patel, T. (1987). Women’s work and their status: Dialectics of subordination and assertion. Social Action, 37, 126–149.
Scott, J. W. (2007). The politics of the veil. Princeton University Press.
Sharma, U. (1978). Women and their affines: The veil as a symbol of separation. Man, 13(2), 218–233.
Spivak, G. C. (2010). “Can the subaltern speak?” Revised Edition, from the “History” Chapter of critique of postcolonial reason. In R. C. Morris (Ed.), Can the subaltern speak?: Reflections on the history of an idea (pp. 21–78). Columbia University Press.
Talpad Mohanty, C. (2003). Feminism without border: Decolonizing theory, practicing solidarity. Duke University Press.
Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1256–1269 Accessed on 20/02/2022. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/14534449_Are_Shame_Guilt_and_Embarrassment_Distinct_Emotions
Tarlo, E. (2010). Visibly Muslim: Fashion, politics, faith. Berg.
Taylor, G. (2002). Pride, shame, and guilt: Emotions of self-assessment. Clarendon Press.
Wadud, A. (1999). Quran and the women. Oxford University Press.
Acknowledgements
This paper is the culmination of our extensive conversations on the topic of Hindu women's position in North India post-marriage, with a particular focus on the issue of veiling. We are deeply grateful to Richa Singh, an independent researcher and our dear friend, for her invaluable insights and contributions to shaping this paper. We wish to acknowledge the valuable contributions of our students, whose enthusiastic participation and engagement with the topic have enriched our understanding and provided valuable insights. We also express our gratitude to the reviewers of Sophia for their constructive feedback and suggestions, which have proven instrumental in enhancing the quality and depth of our paper. A special acknowledgement is reserved for Prof. Purushottam Bilimoria, whose meticulous review and meticulous attention to detail significantly contributed to the structure and argumentation of our paper. His guidance and expertise have been instrumental in shaping this work into a coherent and well-structured piece. We are sincerely thankful to all those who have contributed to the development of this paper and have enriched our understanding of this complex and important topic.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
In the paper, we opt to use Urdu cognates, which are more prevalent in Hindi-speaking communities. It's important to note that this choice is not intended to prejudice against the Muslim practice. Criticism of veiling in the form of the burkhā, hijāb, or the broader pan-Indian veiling practice should not be misconstrued as a reflection on the Muslim practice, which is protected by Muslim Personal Law.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Jaiswal, R., Rai, P. Why Do We Need to Discuss the Practice of Veiling?. SOPHIA (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-023-00993-w
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-023-00993-w