The 2024 Paris Olympics, the 33rd Summer Olympic Games, is not only a globally anticipated sporting event but also a site of emerging sociopolitical controversy. Among the most contentious issues is the prohibition of the hijab, a traditional garment worn by many Muslim women. This ban has sparked backlash from Muslim communities and human rights organizations, who argue that it infringes upon religious freedom and hinders the inclusion of Muslim female athletes. This essay will explore the complex relationship between the hijab and feminism, emphasizing individual liberty and the broader implications of the ban in the realm of international sports.

In September 2023, France’s Minister of Sports, Amélie Oudéa-Castéra, declared that French athletes would not be allowed to wear the hijab at the 2024 Olympics, citing the principle of laïcité, or secularism. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) does not enforce a universal rule banning the hijab, instead deferring to the regulations of each sport’s international federation. Some French sports federations have banned the hijab in domestic competitions, citing safety and neutrality. In contrast, FIFA lifted its hijab ban in 2014 after widespread criticism.

France has a long-standing history of restricting religious attire in public institutions. The 2004 ban on religious symbols in schools and the 2010 law against face coverings reflect a broader state policy aimed at separating religion from the public sphere. These measures raise essential questions: Are such regulations genuinely motivated by the desire to preserve neutrality, or do they stem from underlying biases? Can the hijab ban be regarded as a legitimate institutional decision, or does it signify an unjustifiable restriction on personal freedoms?

The hijab has often been perceived as a symbol of oppression, particularly in countries like Iran and Afghanistan, where it is imposed by law. In such contexts, it becomes a tool of state control over women’s bodies and identities. Critics argue that requiring women to cover themselves is inherently oppressive and reinforces patriarchal structures. However, in nations such as France or the United States, many women choose to wear the hijab as a personal expression of faith and autonomy. In these cases, the hijab becomes a symbol of agency rather than subjugation. Athletes like Diaba Konaté and Sounkamba Sylla have emphasized that wearing the hijab is a conscious act of self-expression and religious belief. For some women, the hijab even serves as a form of protection, preserving their dignity and boundaries in public spaces.

Islam’s holy scripture, the Qur’an, encourages modesty, but does not enforce a rigid dress code. While some regimes have misused religious texts to mandate the hijab, these interpretations often stem from broader systemic violations of human rights and do not represent the core tenets of Islam. Genuine Islam promotes modesty without coercion, allowing women to choose how they present themselves. Therefore, the right to choose whether to wear the hijab must be preserved as an essential component of women’s autonomy.

In patriarchal societies, women have historically been denied the right to choose their careers, education, and lifestyle. Feminism advocates for the right to choose. This includes the right to wear or not wear the hijab. Thus, banning the hijab not only undermines the principle of gender equality but also violates women’s right to self-determination. Numerous Muslim female athletes have experienced exclusion and discrimination due to such prohibitions, feeling alienated from a sporting environment that should be inclusive and empowering. This prompts a critical reflection on whether such policies respect or infringe upon personal freedoms.

The ban on the hijab has resulted in tangible harm. Diaba Konaté, a basketball player, faced significant barriers because she was required to remove her hijab to compete. While living in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, she found solace and identity in her faith and attire. The ban not only jeopardized her athletic aspirations but also severed her from her religious identity. Similarly, sprinter Sounkamba Sylla was barred from participating in the opening ceremony of the Paris Olympics solely due to her hijab. Such experiences demonstrate that the policy does not simply uphold neutrality, but also marginalizes athletes based on their faith, raising serious concerns about fairness and inclusion in sports.

There is a visible contradiction within feminist movements regarding the hijab. Some feminists in France argue that banning it is essential for promoting gender equality, while others believe such a ban undermines women’s rights by denying them agency. These opposing views reflect differing historical and societal contexts. Recognizing this diversity is essential for any meaningful feminist discourse. Feminism should embrace both the fight against imposed dress codes and the defense of women’s right to choose what they wear. True liberation lies in honoring personal choice, not dictating it.

The hijab is often misrepresented as a symbol of violence or extremism, largely due to political, historical, and media-driven narratives. It has been wrongly associated with terrorism and radicalism, generating irrational fear. In France, six out of ten people believe that Islam has too much influence in the country, and 43% perceive it as a threat to national identity. Media coverage of terrorism involving Muslim individuals contributes to these stereotypes, fueling misconceptions about the hijab and its wearers. However, equating all Muslims with extremism is a harmful generalization. While the pain of past tragedies cannot be ignored, it is equally unjust to punish or alienate innocent individuals based on fear.

French secularism, or laïcité, is rooted in the 1905 law that separates church and state. This principle has been criticized internationally for its rigid interpretation, which often alienates religious minorities. In its original spirit, laïcité was intended to protect citizens’ right to believe—or not to believe—without state interference. Yet, it has increasingly been used to suppress public expressions of faith, turning a tool of protection into an instrument of exclusion. The misuse of secularism distorts its foundational values, resulting in policies that prioritize ideological purity over human rights.

Balancing individual freedom with collective regulations is a complex task. Society must consider whether governmental intervention is justified or constitutes oppression. While some restrictions, such as those in public schools, might aim to ensure neutrality, banning the hijab in international sports raises concerns about overreach and injustice. Government action becomes oppressive when it disproportionately restricts fundamental rights without reasonable justification. Laws must be evaluated based on their necessity and impact on those affected.

Diverging feminist views on the hijab underscore the challenges of internal consistency within the movement. Feminist groups in France may focus on promoting gender neutrality in public life, whereas others elsewhere emphasize the right to individual expression. To avoid weakening each other, feminist movements must learn to coexist through mutual respect and dialogue. Collaboration and a shared commitment to justice will allow feminism to evolve in a way that embraces both equality and freedom of choice.

The hijab ban at the 2024 Paris Olympics has generated significant controversy and criticism from human rights groups and Muslim communities. Organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have condemned the ban as a violation of religious and personal freedoms, urging policymakers to reconsider in the interest of fairness and inclusion. The European Human Rights League also denounced the policy, stating it creates discrimination and hinders Muslim women’s participation in international sports.

From a personal standpoint, the ban appears to infringe upon women’s individual rights, especially in a world increasingly defined by cultural and religious diversity. This restriction not only undermines women’s autonomy but also risks deepening social division and reinforcing prejudice. In a global landscape that aspires toward equity and understanding, respecting personal freedoms and cultural expression is paramount.

Beyond surface-level regulations, society must ask how sports can serve as a platform for global solidarity and mutual respect. To ensure fairness and inclusivity in international athletics, the right to individual expression—including the choice to wear religious attire like the hijab—must be preserved. When personal freedom is protected and respected, international sporting events can truly become symbols of peace and cross-cultural understanding. Women’s autonomy must be recognized holistically, not curtailed by policies that risk fostering exclusion or control. At its core, the essential question remains: is the hijab ban truly a form of liberation, or is it another means of controlling women?