Freedom to Dress (Op-Ed from a Pakistani Newspaper)

From the International News, a leading English-language newspaper in Pakistan

Freedom to Dress

Friday, October 26, 2007
Azmat Ashraf

While watching a show on television the other night it was brought to my attention that the media sometimes is not so objective in its approach. Even though every journalism course teaches one to be objective and impartial when reporting, this doesn't appear to be the case. Dr Zakir Naik has created quite a stir because of his elephant's memory and vast knowledge on Islam and other major religions of the world. He was asked if Sadia Mirza, being a Muslim, should refrain from dressing in a short skirt while playing tennis because it is haram. To which the learned doctor replied that when media personnel asked the same question to the young tennis star she wondered why she was asked this question and no other player. Just because she is a Muslim?

Dr Naik said that the point she raised was valid because all religions stress modesty in dress. Be it Christianity, Hinduism or Islam. He also focused on the point that Sadia Mirza is said to pray five times a day. Prayer is the first pillar of Islam. It is what differentiates a Muslim from a non-Muslim and in this regard prayer takes precedence on dress. Dr Naik also said that there were some Muslim cricketers who did not even pray and asked why that was not brought into the limelight?

Another interesting thing is that the burqa-clad women are not the one's complaining, rather the more moderate ones.

The requirement to dress modestly is there in all religions of the world. Its just that people of other religions refuse to follow it. There is little difference in how nuns dress and how women are supposed to dress in Islam. Does this means that all Christian women should wear a wimple and be covered head to toe? Modesty of dress, however, is not synonymous with liberalism – something the west takes great pride in being. Also if women in the west are free to dress in any manner they deem fit, so too should Muslim women. The first amendment focuses on freedom of expression, so why is that freedom one sided? If a woman walks into a store dressed in the way that Muslim women might choose to dress, why are they stared at and seen with resentment?

The media writes about Sadia Mirza because writing about a Muslim girl who has made it big sells, especially since there are no Muslim tennis players. In that the media is ignorant and is going with the flow. How come no one comments about beach volleyball which is played by women wearing bikinis?

And how is that what was considered taboo many years ago is slowing becoming acceptable in today's society? Many years ago women who dressed in a revealing fashion were considered to be of loose morals even in the west. Nowadays baring one's body is considered 'sexy' which is what men desire. If one watches music videos on MTV women are shown surrounding rappers skimpy dressed with the singers referring to them as 'my bitches'.

Previously homosexuality was a social taboo, people were ashamed of their kids being gay but now the law in America has allowed people of the opposite sex to live in matrimonial bliss. The tiniest of bikinis worn these days do not require people's imaginations to come into play since much skin is bared. Will there come a time when the norm would be to swim in the nude, or is that trend here already? Indulgence in pornography was considered a vice. Now such websites are among the most popular on the web. Some may argue that that too is freedom of expression.
What is this world coming to?

The writer is a staff member. Email: azmat.ashraf@then ews.com.pk