After graduating from medical school, Salomat had to settle for working as a masseuse at a Dushanbe beauty salon because hospitals in Tajikistan don’t allow the Islamic hijab, which she wears.

“I had to choose between my career and my faith, and I chose the latter,” says Salomat, who didn’t want to give her full name. “I did remove my hijab in college because I thought that was temporary. But a career is for life.”

Thousands of women in Tajikistan have faced similar choices in recent years as the staunchly secular government in Dushanbe has been increasingly cracking down on the Islamic head scarf at schools and workplaces.

Despite the effective ban on the hijab in public institutions, there is no legislation in Tajikistan that outlaws Islamic attire. But that is about to change.

Parliament in the predominantly Muslim nation of some 10 million has adopted draft amendments to the law on “traditions and celebrations” that will ban the wearing, importing, selling, and advertising of “clothes alien to Tajik culture,” a term widely used by officials to describe Islamic clothing.


Several Dushanbe residents told RFE/RL that they don’t support a ban on certain types of clothes because they believe people should be free to choose what clothes they want to wear.

“It’s important to have the freedom to choose our own clothes. There shouldn’t be a law ordering us what to wear,” said Munira Shahidi, an expert on art and culture.

Most Tajiks believe the new amendments would only legalize a “ban that has already been in place for years.”

  • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I don’t think I understand your comment. Are you saying you think those men only let them go out because they expected them to get a good paying job and now they can’t? Or like because of the masseuse thing?

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m saying they won’t be allowed to leave their homes because if given the choice between letting them leave uncovered or holding them prisoner, muslims who coerce the hijab will opt for holding them prisoner.

      This is basically a hostile architecture law. Something that doesn’t actually address any of the problems it’s supposedly meant to solve, but instead just forces the people affected by it out of public view where others won’t see it and start pestering their leaders about it.