Recently, scholars have propagated a ‘claim-based’ approach towards the study of women’s substantive representation. In this article, we challenge the relativism of such a ‘claim-based’ approach and explore the relevance of the concept of ‘responsiveness’ as a democratic criterion. We do so, more specifically, through a study of Muslim women’s substantive representation in the Flemish headscarf debate. We identify claims to speak for Muslim women formulated by (1) political parties and (2) Muslim women and (minority) women’s associations and examine the congruence between their respective claims. The important incongruence found between the claims formulated by right-wing and liberal parties and those of Muslim women/women’s associations provides empirical backing to the acclaimed relevance of a relational evaluation of women’s substantive representation. We conclude that the criterion of responsiveness is invaluable because it allows us to evaluate if actors’ claims to speak for women account for women’s capacity to speak for themselves.