Is Hijab actually liberating? An Anthropological and Genealogical take

Hijab, burqa, and bikini – the lead-up to the assembly elections across 5 states in the country have seen these three keywords dominate the space. Although the progeny of controversy was the non-election state of Karnataka, it quickly snowballed into a national controversy with opposition using it as ammo to sweep the Muslim votes by brainwashing them with false equivalences and empty retorts.

However, the reader may wonder, what is Burqa and why is there an incessant urge to don this drab, dark, and dingy piece of clothing? Well, the answer lies when we look a little inwards and trace back our history — the Homosapien history? Let’s dive into it, shall we?

Few know that we humans are not the first inhabitants of the planet. Homo Erectus, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis, etc., all came before us. However, our evolution and ability to better ourselves made us dominate other species. Eventually, we placed ourselves on the top of the food chain, dominating the animal kingdom with impunity. Thus, without quoting one Darwin, evolution forms the bedrock of our existence.

Evolution has been unkind to women

We are called Homo sapiens and contrary to what the rainbow activists may say, we have only two genders biologically — Male and Female. As explained by TFI founder Atul Mishra in a nuanced social media thread, evolution has been rather unkind to women.

Talking about the advantages of males over the fairer sex, Mr Mishra stated, “Evolution has been most unkind to women. It’s evolution that gave males the advantage that they currently enjoy. The physical size, muscle strength and same energy levels on all days of the month made man what he became.”

It was because of this superiority and the single different chromosome (XY) that often women were rendered immobile for a period of 6 months at least, when pregnant.

Males dominated, gained superiority, subjugating women

This allowed the Male specimen to roam across and spread his kingdom by impregnating other women. Marriages and monogamy as a concept didn’t exist then. As a result, the Men gained numbers and superiority in the gene pool.

The thread further asserts, “In the Hunter-gatherer days of the humankind, the man hunted and the woman gathered. Hunting wasn’t a daily routine but gathering was. They had the most important task of producing children and providing for them.”

Additionally, women were also used as beasts of burden. A woman was also a property to be bartered for food, blankets, other animals etc.

It is pertinent to note this point as it posits that men had already started calling the shots by restricting women to a certain role. Connect the dots and you’d realize that we are merely carrying the old, archaic traditions, which again is anti-evolution, to say the least.

The curious case of Human genes

And this is the beauty of genetics, the human body, and science. Genes don’t care for your political or regional inclinations. They don’t have value or belief systems. They simply copy-paste the data and pass it along to the next generation. The experiences from the past are written in the gene code.

Consequently, the code of subjugation is passed on from one generation to another. It’s still easier to brainwash a woman than a man. It’s easier still to make her toe a line that may even be self-destructive. Of course, exceptions do exist, but they tend to prove the rule.

Hijabs which have metamorphosed into Burqa come under the same category. It’s the result of thousands of years of subjugation that genes carry to date, coupled with constant religious brainwashing that Muslims are claiming Hijab to be a liberating choice.

It’s thoroughly difficult to unlearn than learn anything. And Muslim women are having difficulty unlearning their gene code.

Wokeism is anti-evolution and so is a Burqa

Most of the crusaders batting for Muslim women being allowed to wear the patriarchal ‘Burqa’ are from the woke community. And as we at TFI have already established, wokeism is anti-evolution. They do not want the women to be liberated in the truest sense. Their fight is to take a 180 to anything, the rational lobby, often crudely termed as Right-wing takes.

Read More: Wokeism is anti-evolution

A simple question needs to be asked to the proponents of Burqa. Weren’t the woke against the tyranny of patriarchy? It defeats the purpose when you hide behind the ‘choice of freedom argument’ to allow Muslim women to wear a piece of clothing that is nothing but the shining piece of toxic male patriarchy at its finest.

Moreover, weren’t Burqas and Hijabs allowed by the Prophet when the male gaze of outsiders fell upon his lady? Thus, by allowing Burqa, the old stereotype that women are the property of men and need to be protected from outside gaze is perpetuated. We ask in all humility, where exactly is the freedom?

The crusaders of the ‘Burqa’ cause are simply emulating the men of the yore, albeit through a supposed myopic progressive route. However, the endgame in both situations is that women are indoctrinated to believe that Burqa is their freedom of choice.

Read More: 13 reasons why Hijab is unnecessary and it has nothing to do with religion

The controversy

The entire controversy started from Karnataka’s Udupi district. But no one exactly knows who started it and what it intended to achieve at first. Although whispers suggest it was the work of PFI to drown the suicide news cycle of Lavanya.

However, what started as a meek attempt to wear hijab in school has turned into a full-blown campaign against Hindus, India and lastly BJP.

Moreover, High court petitions have been filed to allow Burqa (a symbol of male oppression) everywhere including schools, where uniform is a mandatory pre-requisite.

Read more: True culprits behind the Hijab row are out

The upshot is that burqa is a symbol of male oppression and yet some are adamant to push it as a matter of choice. It is a dichotomy of evolution. The genes remember its code because it helps us survive but it also makes us rigid to our hunter-gatherer style of living.