Ringkasan:
● Pemaksaan dan pelarangan jilbab melanggar kebebasan beragama dan memicu tekanan psikologis serius.
● Tekanan sistemik menghasilkan kekerasan simbolik dan konflik identitas mendalam.
● Perempuan merespons tekanan melalui adaptasi, perlawanan, dan advokasi diri yang membentuk transformasi pribadi.
Oleh: Fransisca Yohana Sri Winarsih | Republikasi dari ICRS
Kompas.com reported on a case involving the alleged forced wearing of a hijab by a female student at Banguntapan 1 State Senior High School in the Special Region of Yogyakarta (DIY). The incident came to light in July 2022. A 16-year-old female student experienced depression, reportedly because several teachers compelled her to wear a hijab, even though there were no regional regulations in DIY mandating or prohibiting female students in public schools from wearing the hijab. It also reported that, as a solution, the school offered the student a transfer to another school. In response to this situation, Yogyakarta Governor Sri Sultan Hamengku Buwono X suspended the principal and three teachers involved. The Governor emphasised that the core issue was the enforcement of hijab wearing. He noted that the school’s proposal to transfer the student did not address this fundamental problem.
Hijab and Face Veil (Cadar): A tool of religious expression and oppression
Rosita Dian Hidayati from the Centre for Religious and Cross-cultural Studies (CRCS) conducted research around this issue. Rosita notes that incidents similar to those above did not only occur in Yogyakarta. Numerous cases of both coercion and prohibition have been reported in educational institutions and workplaces across the country, reflecting a broader pattern of structural discrimination against religious freedom. Her research delves into the issue of coercion and prohibition surrounding Muslim women’s hijab and face veil (cadar). The research is conducted in Yogyakarta and other regions. She aims to explore the psychological impacts on women subjected to pressure and how they respond to it. She seeks to contribute to a deeper understanding of religious freedom, identity, and agency in the context of contemporary societal pressures.
Rosita’s study is a qualitative research of five women who experienced coercion and prohibition of wearing hijab. The research sites are educational institutions in Yogyakarta and other regions. She employs Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). Rosita uses Nancy Krieger’s Eco-Social Theory. It posits that discrimination, viewed as external pressure, embodied in systemic pressures, significantly impacts individuals’ health, including mental health, particularly psychological distress. She also uses the Women’s Agency approach to understand how women who experience discrimination navigate the systemic pressure. This study employs multiple perspectives on womenʼs agency, highlighting that agency can take many forms.
The hijab and cadar is a symbol of religious observance and identity for Muslim women. Wearing or not wearing a hijab or cadar is the right of every Muslim woman. Therefore, forcing or prohibiting someone from wearing a hijab or cadar violates their religious freedom. Furthermore, coercion or prohibition will cause psychological distress. When an individual decides to wear or remove a hijab or cadar, we can view it as part of their spiritual journey.
Rosita observes that the issue of the hijab and cadar has been a topic of ongoing debate. The history of the hijab in Indonesia dates back to the 7th century, when Islam arrived in the region. At that time, Hinduism and Buddhism were already practised in Indonesia, and neither religion recognised the concept of ‘aurat.’ Wearing hijab or cadar was not a form of religious expression within those faiths. Before the Dutch colonial era, interpretations of the hijab varied throughout the Indonesian archipelago. For example, the hijab worn by Muslim women in Sulawesi was different from those in Java. During the Dutch colonial era, the hijab served as a means of resistance for Muslim women. They wore hijabs to affirm their religious identity and symbolise their defiance against colonial pressures. A notable example of this resistance is Cut Nyak Dhien. Then, the 20th century marked an era of Islamic revival, influenced by the Dutch Ethical Policy and modern Islamic thought. This revival led organisations like Muhammadiyah and Persis to adopt varied approaches regarding the hijab.
During the New Order era, the government enforced a regulation prohibiting female students in state schools from wearing hijab. Some, including Emha Ainun Nadjib, view this regulation as a violation of religious freedom. He responded to the regulation with a poem entitled ‘Lautan Jilbab,’ which was presented at a theatre performance in Yogyakarta. Nadjib’s performance was a symbolic act of resistance against the policy banning the hijab. He argues that the choice to wear or not wear a hijab is a matter of religious freedom, and no one, not even the state, has the authority to regulate it. Ultimately, the government decided to revoke the policy.
The government does not regulate the hijab in institutions, including educational institutions. However, there have been several cases in schools showing the coercion or prohibition of the hijab on both female students and teachers. Both coercion and prohibition directly violate freedom of religion and belief, as enshrined in International Human Rights Law Article 18(1) and the Indonesian Constitution Article 29(2). The government’s efforts to prevent coercion, such as the 2021 Joint Ministerial Decree, have faced setbacks, including annulment by the Supreme Court, which has allowed ongoing challenges to persist across Indonesia. Regional autonomy strengthens the discriminatory local regulations.
Symbolic Violence, Systemic Intimidation, and Their Psychological Impact
Rosita explains that although there are no government regulations on hijab use in DIY, an unwritten rule continues to shape the experiences of female students and teachers. The decision to wear or not wear the hijab may appear to be a personal choice, yet participants consistently encounter pressure from teachers, coworkers, and principals. When a student is coerced by school authorities or when teachers face pressure from their superiors, unequal power relations become evident. This sustained and enforced pressure generates significant psychological distress. One participant stopped attending classes due to being compelled to wear a hijab, while another experienced coercion from senior colleagues. These cases reveal how systemic pressure from those in power contributes to ongoing patterns of symbolic violence and oppression.
This coercive environment also produces deep psychological consequences. Structural injustice and systematic intimidation—whether through pressure to wear the hijab or prohibition against not wearing it—undermine participants’ emotional and mental well-being. Many described intense negative emotions that gradually escalated into severe mental health challenges. Two participants reported that prolonged anger and sadness developed into depression, highlighting the profound psychological wounds that such coercion can inflict.
Beyond mental health, these pressures also disrupt participants’ sense of identity. Feelings of self-alienation emerge when systemic expectations clash with personal beliefs, bodily autonomy, and spiritual integrity. Participants shared experiences of internal conflict, a growing distance from their true selves, and a diminishing trust in their religious communities. One described developing feelings of self-dislike, while others felt increasingly estranged from the very faith spaces that were meant to support them. Together, these experiences demonstrate how symbolic violence, psychological harm, and identity conflict are interconnected realities produced by systemic intimidation.
Women’s Agency: Adaptation, Resistance, and Transformation
This study highlights the multifaceted nature of women’s agency. Rather than being passive victims, the participants exercise their agency through three interconnected strategies: adaptation and compromise, self-resistance, and self-advocacy and transformation, which together reveal their resilience, autonomy, and capacity for change.
Through adaptation and compromise, participants show their ability to make thoughtful choices based on their circumstances. Even when confronted with unfair or restrictive rules, they carefully consider how to respond. This reflective decision-making allows them to find personal meaning amid adversity and demonstrates the complexity of their agency. By navigating these challenges, they convert pressure into opportunities for growth, often supported by family members who understand their struggles.
Self-resistance emerges when participants can no longer adapt or compromise. Acts of refusal, defiance, and deliberate non-conformity become tools to protect their autonomy. Some choose not to comply with coercive rules, refusing to wear the hijab when forced, or continuing to wear it when prohibited. These acts reveal a strong sense of independence and a conscious effort to challenge the limitations imposed on them.
Finally, self-advocacy and transformation represent the most assertive and empowering form of agency. Participants raise their voices to assert their rights, confront oppressive power relations, and articulate their identities and beliefs. For many, this process becomes deeply transformative, prompting shifts in mindset, faith, or spirituality. One participant even chose to convert to another religion, a decision likely shaped by multiple complex factors, with coercion serving as a possible catalyst.
Together, these strategies show that women are not merely responding to oppression but actively shaping their paths: adapting, resisting, and transforming in ways that redefine their sense of self and their place within their communities.
Insights from the Research
The hijab and the cadar have long been subjects of contention and debate. In discussions surrounding their use, it becomes evident that coercion often originates from those who hold more power, regardless of whether they are men or women. Thus, the issue of coercion related to the hijab is not solely a matter of gender; rather, it is intricately connected to the dynamics of power relations. The participants who experienced coercion reported a greater psychological burden compared to those who faced a ban, highlighting the need for more supportive approaches in such situations.
For many individuals, the hijab represents a profound symbol of religious expression, allowing them to embody their faith and identity. For those confronting various challenges, the hijab transforms into a powerful act of resistance, a visible declaration of strength and autonomy against societal pressures. For those in positions of power, the hijab and cadar may be perceived as an instrument of oppression, a way to enforce control and conformity within the narrative of cultural norms.
It is essential to understand the context in which this research was conducted. Yogyakarta is a province governed by a sultan who holds the title ‘Sayidin Panatagama Khalifatullah.’ The sultan serves not only as the head of government but also as the leader of the Muslim community in the region. Interestingly, none of the sultan’s daughters wear the hijab or cadar. If similar research were conducted in other locations, the results could vary significantly.
Editor: Andrianor