Amanda Spielman, head of Ofsted, says “creating an environment where primary school children are expected to wear the hijab could be interpreted as sexualisation of young girls” (Inspectors to question girls in primary school who wear hijab, 20 November). These inspections and the accusation that hijab “sexualises” girls are absurd and reek of prejudice.
As a Muslim mother, I do not believe, according to Islamic jurisprudence, that my daughters should wear hijab before they are young women and I will never coerce them to wear hijab at any stage. Yet, in an attempt to copy my mother, I stubbornly wore hijab as a young girl against the wish of my parents then. So, I would like to ask Amanda Spielman, will Ofsted inspectors be “questioning” young girls copying their mothers, whether by wearing hijab, lipstick or stilettos?
The argument that hijab, as a religious headgear, “sexualises” girls is flawed. If it does then it also “sexualises” women. Many Muslim women view hijab as an article of faith and modesty that liberates them from objectifying societal expectations, and this is what I will teach my daughters.
Amanda Spielman is arguing that a certain garment sexualises girls. If so, will Ms Spielman be extending this “inspection” to cover other items of clothing? Do short skirts sexualise girls more than trousers? What about girls’ weather-exposed shoes compared to well-padded boys’ shoes? Will Ms Spielman focus only on girls, or are boys wearing skullcaps and turbans bound to be “sexualised” too?
Shockingly, the NSPCC reported that 31% of women in the UK experienced sexual abuse in childhood. Ofsted needs to get its priorities right instead of targeting a minority Muslim population and excluding the voice of Muslim parents.
Dr Sana Ramiz
Manchester
