Congress’s selective feminism: Hijab is religion, rakhi is patriarchy

NewsBharati 26-Aug-2026 19:52:00 PM

Total Views |

Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera has inadvertently exposed one of Congress’s most enduring political contradictions. Its definition of women’s freedom appears to change with the religion involved.

Khera’s recent statement on hijab sounds liberal at first. Women, he says, have the right to choose what they wear hijab, veil or any other attire. Fair enough. A woman’s choice should indeed be respected.

But then comes the qualification - whether hijab is an essential part of Islam, he says, is for religious scholars to decide.

Stop there.

If women’s freedom is the principle, why does a religious scholar get to enter the decision-making process? And now place this beside Rahul Gandhi’s approach to Raksha Bandhan and Hindu tradition. Suddenly Congress’s political vocabulary becomes very different. Hindu customs are routinely examined through the prism of patriarchy, gender politics and individual freedom. The Hindu woman is frequently presented as someone who needs liberation from tradition. But when the subject is hijab, suddenly religious authority becomes relevant. Why? Is patriarchy unacceptable when practised by Hindus but somehow exempt when it operates under a religious label?

This is not an argument against hijab. A Muslim woman should have the freedom to wear it if she chooses. The same principle must apply to a Hindu woman who chooses to observe Raksha Bandhan, wear traditional attire, follow a family custom or embrace a civilisational tradition. The woman decides. Not Rahul Gandhi. Not Pawan Khera. Not a religious scholar. Not a political party. That is what genuine individual liberty means.

ALSO READ: Caste census: Count caste, but do not make it the currency of politics

But Congress repeatedly seems incapable of applying this principle uniformly. Rahul Gandhi’s politics around Hindu festivals makes the contradiction impossible to ignore. Raksha Bandhan is not merely an item of clothing or a political photo opportunity. It is a deeply rooted Hindu cultural tradition built around affection, responsibility and the bond between siblings. If Congress wants to debate individual choice, let it debate individual choice consistently. But it cannot simultaneously suggest that Hindu traditions must pass the test of modern political sensitivities while Muslim practices deserve special protection from scrutiny because religious scholars may have something to say about them. That is not equality. It is selective sensitivity. And selective sensitivity is the heart of appeasement politics.

Congress has spent decades presenting itself as the defender of minorities. But protection from discrimination is not the same thing as political exemption. If patriarchy is wrong, it is wrong everywhere. If women’s autonomy matters, it matters everywhere. If tradition deserves respect, that respect cannot be distributed according to electoral arithmetic.

This is where Pawan Khera’s formulation becomes politically revealing. He wants both arguments at once. He wants women’s autonomy when it suits the argument, but religious authority when the subject enters the politically sensitive territory of Islam. That raises an uncomfortable question. Does Congress regard Muslim women as autonomous individuals, or does their autonomy require religious validation?

ALSO READ: J&K reopens 1998 Wandhama massacre of 23 Kashmiri Pandits case; Know what exactly happened on the night of January 25, 1998

And if religious scholars can determine whether hijab is an essential religious practice, why is the same deference not extended to Hindu traditions when Congress discusses them? Why is Raksha Bandhan subjected to political interpretation while hijab is approached with religious caution? Why is Hindu tradition so often treated as something to be interrogated, corrected and modernised, while Islamic practices are approached with a layer of political nervousness? Congress may call this secularism.

The public is entitled to call it something else. It's appeasement.

The problem with Congress’s politics is not that it speaks about women’s freedom. It is that its feminism often appears to have a community filter. The Hindu woman is told - exercise your freedom, question tradition, challenge patriarchy. The Muslim woman is told - your choice is yours, but first let religious scholars determine the religious status of that choice. What kind of equality is this?

ALSO READ: Gandhi refers to Manusmriti, calling to 'smash patriarchy'. Here's how he 'supported' hijab, kept mum on Islamic patriarchy

What kind of feminism is this? And what kind of secularism requires different intellectual standards for different communities?

Rahul Gandhi should therefore be careful before turning Hindu festivals into occasions for political messaging. If Congress genuinely believes that women should be free from patriarchal control, it should apply that principle without fear or favour. Congress cannot claim to liberate women from patriarchy while selectively deferring to religious authority. It cannot preach equality while practising different standards. And it cannot keep calling appeasement secularism simply because the word sounds more respectable. Women’s freedom cannot have a Hindu version and a Muslim version. If Congress cannot understand that, it should stop lecturing the country about equality.

Congress Hindu traditions Raksha Bandhan Hindu woman feminism Rahul Gandhi