The point that the article makes I find most compelling deals with the human right's issue of telling women how to dress.
Social activist and university lecturer Janaki Prabhakar puts the issue into perspective. “The problem is that everyone is looking at the issue from a political or economic angle,” she says. “Nobody is thinking about the serious human rights violation the proposed bikini ban might entail.”Basically these clothing bans, which more often than not focus on woman's fashion, send the message that women do not know what is appropriate for them and that men have no control of their sexuality.
And that indeed is the crux of the problem. According to Prabhakar, the rallying cry for a bikini ban amounts to foisting one lobby’s cultural interpretation of clothing over the right of women to dress as they deem appropriate. “It is a shocking infringement of women's sartorial freedom, which further discounts their ability to think and act for themselves,” she adds.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, there is Sarkozy's desire to ban all burqa's in France. His reasons for doing it is to oppose what he sees as a cultural prison for women:
“In our country we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity...The burka is not a religious sign. It is a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement,” he added. “It will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic.”So here's the Catch 22...if it is not ok for India to legislate whether or not women can wear a bikini than it most certainly cannot be ok for France to legislate whether or not women can wear burkas. Even if one is an example of sexual freedom and one is an example of sexual imprisonment, both can be flipped and seen as the opposite (bikini's imprison women to a standard of beauty and objectification, burka is an example of religious freedom). Basically I come on the side of clothing (or lack there of) should not be a matter of legislation...women should wear what makes them feel happy/comfortable/sexy/respectable/pious/whatever-they-want to express and men are rational beings who will not be turned into sex zombies at the sight of female flesh. Any further comments??
I no longer even know how to approach these conversations. Debase men by taking away their human dignity, their capacity to think because they are apparently no better than children with bad manners. Give women all this power and then use it to make them responsible for the actions of others. As far as I can tell, these issues are cultural distress signals related to underlying economic problems. When the money and resources become scarce, the rules of group engagement become harsher. Whether its the newbies (whoever is moving to whatever location) or old lines of distinction, it's easier to point fingers and say "your fault" rather than reflect on and take responsible action for, the events that led to this situation. Its the blacks and the jews, and those damn uppity women. Oh yeah, and don't forget about "the Man" keeping you down (although that one has grounds to stand on). When we're living the good life, its easier to celebrate and enjoy the things that make us different. When things start getting rough and we're not bringing home the bacon our father did, we could tighten our belts and make sure everyone has enough to get by, but our self-entitled selves prefer to place blame -those damn _______ are taking our jobs. India and France and experiencing economic change for different reasons but the knee jerk reaction seems to be the same.
ReplyDelete