I refer to Abu Mubarak's letter Decent dressing: What are the parameters?
His letter mentions that the banning of the 'hijab' in certain European countries is evidence that there are limits to the levels of tolerance shown to Muslim immigrants and that Muslim immigrants are expected to blend themselves with the local people, including their choice of clothing.
What the letter fails to address is the reason behind this supposed declining level of tolerance or the events that led to the European societies being more concerned over their immigrant communities. Do recall that in the past couple of years, several incidents have happened involving these immigrant communities. In London, terrorists from the immigrant community blew up a bus and several compartments on three tube lines killing more than 50 people (including Muslims and many others from the immigrant community). In Madrid, terrorists from the immigrant community bombed a train resulting in more than 190 casualties. Near Paris, riots erupted with members of the immigrant community torching more than a 100 cars. Just a couple of days ag,o it emerged that Mustaf Jama (a fugitive police murderer) evaded security at the Heathrow Airport in London by donning a full 'hijab' and using his sister's passport.
As the above demonstrates, many European societies seem to be considering banning the 'hijab' and veil out of fear, assuming that it could be concealing a terrorist or a criminal, making the task of identifying a person more difficult. Some of the reasons behind the banning of the headscarf in schools in France were that it was considered to be a symbol of oppression of women and even a symbol of Islamic extremism. Hence, the infringement of personal liberties of the immigrant Muslims in European countries is mostly due to fear and security reasons and partly due to slightly misguided attempts to integrate Muslims into society and liberate women.
As such, it is absurd to compare the situation in Kota Baru to that of Europe. The Kota Baru Municipal Council has determined that 'sexily dressed women' were enticing men into their stores and as such has banned women from wearing certain articles of clothing. There is no similarity between the situation in Europe and Kota Baru as the Kota Bharu council ban on clothing it has deemed to be 'sexy' has nothing to do with fear, security or forcing women in Kota Baru to integrate with the rest of society in Malaysia because most of Malaysia still allows its people to generally dress at they please. Instead, the Kota Baru council seems intent on alienating itself from the rest of Malaysian society, by singling out women and dictating what they can and cannot wear.
The letter also makes an appeal to all critics of the Kota Baru Municipal Council to clarify what level of decency is acceptable to them instead of condemning the Kota Baru Municipal Council's decision. The point that is missed here is that some of these critics are condemning the decision not because they disagree that people should abide by some standards of decency in their personal attire but because they are concerned about the extent to which a council can infringe upon the liberties of people, specifically women.
The ban today includes sexy jeans but tomorrow it might be the 'baju kebaya', 'cheong sam' and saree and in the near future imposition of head scarves on all women regardless of religious affiliation. Bear in mind the shapeless shrouds and full 'hijab' imposed by the Taliban during their reign - all in the name of decency.
