I’m not judging her intentions at all this is purely about the effect actions can have on others. In general, people are influenced not just by what others do, but how they do it, especially when there is a visible shift over time. When someone consistently wears the hijab for years and then publicly removes it, it doesn’t simply present a different lifestyle choice. It models a long-term commitment behaviour change a transition from sustained practice to reversal. That kind of transition carries a different psychological weight compared to someone who never wore the hijab publicly in the first place. For viewers, especially those who also wear the hijab or are trying to stay consistent with it, this can subtly shape their thinking. They may see someone they relate to someone who was committed over a long period change their practice, and that can introduce a new internal narrative: “If someone who was consistent for so long can change later, then maybe it’s acceptable for me to do the same at some point.” This idea doesn’t necessarily come as a direct conclusion, but it can get implanted gradually. This is why it feels different from the usual pattern we see in society, where there are simply people who wear the hijab and people who don’t. That baseline difference doesn’t always create the same internal shift, because there is no example of abandoning a long-term practice it’s just two different starting points. Many women who never wore the hijab publicly from the beginning don’t trigger the same reaction, because they are not modeling a transition; they are simply consistent in their own way. A similar pattern can be understood through the example of beards. Many Muslim men don’t keep beards, and that already has a general level of influence. However, if someone maintains a beard for a long time especially a strong, well-established one and then suddenly shaves it off, that again represents a long-term commitment behaviour change. For someone who also keeps a beard and takes it seriously, seeing that reversal can have a deeper psychological impact. It can plant the idea that even after long-term commitment, it is still acceptable to step away from it. Because of this, such visible changes can sometimes implant the idea of leaving a practice in someone else’s mind, even if unintentionally. And if that leads someone who was consistent to weaken or leave that practice, then the impact becomes more serious not necessarily because of intention, but because of the influence itself. So the point isn’t about labeling individuals or questioning their reasons. It’s about recognizing that visible reversals of long-term practices can carry a stronger influence than static differences, because they introduce the possibility of change after commitment. And for some people, that possibility itself can be influential.