On women’s attire and gender equality: pondering on the long way ahead
I was strongly tempted to write this article after reading an article entitled On woman’s attire: Are we really tempting young boys and priests, by a writer under the pen name “Gypsy Bohemia”. The article was published on Groundviews on July 10 2009. We learn that the writer of the said article is a journalist working for a leading Sri Lankan newspaper. What follows is a ‘salad ball’ of ideas that stemmed from reading Gypsy Bohemia’s article and reader comments.
First of all, as a Sinhala Buddhist and a Sri Lankan, I extend my sincere appreciation of this writer and I my regret on her unpleasant experience. I fully endorse her viewpoint on the issue. To put it in a nutshell, a Sri Lankan woman found Gypsy Bohemia’s attire ‘unacceptable’ at a public event. Reading through some forty-three reader comments that follow this article, I was left with partial satisfaction and boiling rage. The comments made by some Sri Lankans demonstrate the daunting extent of male-dominated, macho attitudes of some of my countrymen. One Groundviews reader laments the extent of ‘Western influence’ on Sri Lankan women’s’ attires. Some others seem desperate to know what Gypsy Bohemia was wearing, so they can judge if she wore ‘acceptable’ clothes or not. By any means, it is crystal clear that Gypsy Bohemia’s article sparked a good few reactions among Groundviews readers.
In the present article, I wish to make a simple, clear statement: in a ‘civilised’ nation in modern society, a woman’s attire should not form the subject of discussion in relation to national values and morality. The comments made to Gypsy Bohemia’s article clearly show that for some Sri Lankans, a woman’s attire represents something close to morality, and even national values/identity. Through views of this nature, I see a major malaise in contemporary Sri Lankan society.
A woman, especially a young woman (i.e. 80s generation and after) definitely has the right to wear a dress she deems appropriate. If her parents, family or anyone else finds it inappropriate in any way, that is their problem, and not hers. The woman who approached Gypsy Bohemia, who calls herself a consultant, represents the high level of above-mentioned amnesiac malaise in Sri Lankan society. The most challenging fact is that the present political regime in Sri Lanka strongly encourages the healthy continuation of this malaise, instead of taking prompt steps to eradicate it. A good few months ago, I watched a Sri Lankan news bulletin featuring a controversial government minister, who holds a high degree of hatred towards media institutions, notably to the Maharaja Group. When asked why he was so mad at Sirasa TV, the minister’s answer was that Sirasa was instrumental in removing half-saris and dressing up young women with short skirts (Sri Lankan readers may understand, and non-Sri Lankan readers are kindly requested to ask someone familiar with Sri Lanka for clarifications). This view is both directly and indirectly propagated by the present government, which uses it as a means of appeasing hard-line Sinhala nationalists and the Buddhist establishment. This is the government’s key strategy to remain in power; when the large majority of the island’s permanent ethnic majority is successfully fed on Sinhala nationalist euphoria and the endorsement social conceptions on women’s attire and freedom, their support ensures the safe continuation of the regime.
Hence one commenter’s conviction that the ‘priests’ referred to in Gypsy Bohemia’s article are Sinhala Buddhist priests. This writer fully agrees with this view. As some other readers have mentioned, the word ‘priests’ can also refer to ministers of religion in other faiths. If holy men and women of non-Buddhist faiths share this level of contempt on a woman’s attire, it goes without saying that all such views deserve is outright condemnation.
Secondly, some people are worried about so-called ‘Western influences’. To summarise their views, Western influences have a negative impact on the way Sri Lankan women dress. This, by all means, is a pitiful and extremely ignorant assumption, which only shows an extremely high level of prejudice, ignorance, and a chronic inability to understand Sri Lankan society.
The so-called Western societies, and some societies in non-Western parts of the world, have evolved into societies that tolerate equality for the two sexes to a high extent. This applies to all aspects of life, including sexuality. Women’s fashion has evolved through the years, in par with the evolution of societies and cultures into more accommodative and inclusive entities. A society is something in constant evolution, and modern Britain, to give an example, has turned the clock a full circle since the days of Victorian values (which were exported to all parts of the British Empire, and still have some degree of influence in some post-colonial societies).
In Sri Lanka, we belong to an energetic and creative society that is in constant evolution. In such a social landscape, it is our responsibility as young Sri Lankans to tirelessly promote ideas that help create a modern society marked by gender equality, mutual respect (among genders, ethnic groups) and an increasing openness towards the world. Today, what we see in Sri Lanka is the exact opposite, where the state propagates ideas that do not correspond to the social and political needs of the times. Instead of mutual respect between ethnic groups and the development of a sense of in-depth appreciation of ‘the other’, the government is harnessing ethnic prejudices, promoting majoritarian clichés, and capitalising on the rising tides of Sinhala Buddhist nationalism. Instead of promoting the rights of women, gender equality and sexual freedom, the government is actively promoting the exercise of ‘social control’ over women’s sexuality, women’s dress code and is vehemently attacking media groups such as Sirasa that provide new platforms to explore young talent. The euphoria over female dress code can be seen everywhere in public service, where, to be decently and appropriately dressed, it is compulsory for a woman to be dressed in a sari, whereas men in normal office clothing is absolutely fine. This is a major violation of a woman’s right of suitable attire. If a female public servant deems it suitable and convenient, she should have the fullest right and possibility to wear office clothes (i.e. in more comprehensible terms, the so-called ‘Western’ office attire). This should apply to the teaching profession and most importantly, to the Sri Lanka Foreign Service (SLFS). It is pitiful to see how the SLFS forces its female officers to go around in saris, as if a sari (a completely Indian import) represents our national identity. A foreign service that upholds views of this nature can be of very little ‘service’ to a country like Sri Lanka.
I conclude this rendering with a note on what I view as timely and essential acts of reform for Sri Lanka. The state should actively support gender equality, and the rights of women to dress as they wish. In a place of high temperature all year around, it is fully acceptable for people to be dressed accordingly (what some condemn as ‘showing too much flesh’ is an expression of sexual frustration, and should be vehemently opposed). Gender equality is essentially achieved by sexual freedom, and a woman’s sexuality is exclusively her own business. Therefore, the Sinhala Buddhist practice of ‘white-cloth virginity proof’ should be officially prohibited as a punishable offence by law. This also applies to so-called ‘age-attaining ceremonies’, where a young girl’s sexuality is made a matter of family and social concern. These practices are extremely disrespectful, and should not apply to future generations of Sri Lankan women. Now some may say that these are elements of our ‘traditions’. If these acts represent traditions, such traditions only receive contempt and condemnation, not endorsement. Such traditions should be done away with, and replaced by new traditions of sexual freedom and respect. Moreover, the use of the pill, the morning after pill and the female condom should be widely popularised in Sri Lanka, so that young women can freely live their sexuality (this should obviously be accompanied by an extremely strong emphasis on sexual education and safe sex). These are areas where the state needs to take political risks and push new policies forward. Social considerations of wanting to marry a ‘virgin’ and that a young woman should remain a virgin until legal marriage should be discouraged, and gradually made to perish from Sri Lankan society. Reforms of this nature must most certainly include homosexuality, which needs to be legalised in Sri Lanka. Reading these ideas, some may think that given Sri Lanka’s culture and the present situation, this is more of daydreaming; but I stand firmly stating that these ideas in no way present one person’s ramblings, but represent a deeply felt desire among a substantial proportion of Sri Lankan youth.
If reforms of this nature cannot be pursued at state level, it is up to young Sri Lankans, such as the commendably conscientious Gypsy Bohemia, to promote these ideas among Sri Lankan youth (and in the wider Sri Lankan society at home and abroad), leading to required social and political changes.
P.S. the views expressed in this article are exclusively those of the writer. They do not represent positions of any other person or organisation.
18 Comments
Leave a Reply
Subscribe to Content Updates
iPhone app
Brilliantly and eloquently put, Chaminda. I totally agree. I personally know who Gypsy Bohemia is and that made me even more outraged. But that apart, the public invasion of individual choices is outrageous. Recently I was having an argument with an “educated” person who said that decriminalizing homosexuality would encourage such “deviant behaviour”. I was too disgusted to even reply. These are the people who also say that if prostitution was made legal, it would encourage people to become sex workers. We have a long long way to go in evolving towards equality. But we love to hide behind “our culture” (as though it was one, static, fixed entity) and make that an excuse to keep people permanently imprisoned in the dark ages or crucify those who dare to exercise their fundamental human rights. Keep up the good work you are doing, Chami, you are one of those young people who will make a difference.
Chaminda, I agree with Vivi. Thanks for the article, I’m glad to have brought up the topic although it all happened quite by accident! It’s long overdue and the negative comments I got (and I’m sure you will get your fair share as well) only proves how far we have to go.
Check out my blog http://thebohemiangypsy.wordpress.com/ – I published the article there and particularly the last few comments by an individual called NB are particularly worrying. I think people who share his extreme views are a minority, but there are others who would agree on some level, which is cause for concern.
Hiding behind culture is a dangerous thing. There are communities who are fighting for laws to protect practices like genital mutilation under the banner of “culture”. We must realize that some cultural practices simply need to GO. The issue of attire is not as serious, of course, but it’s in the same vein.
Thanks for this article Chaminda, you’ve brought up some really valid points which I hope will be discussed constructively through GV. Good work
Thank you very much for your article Mr. Chaminda. However, you seem to have twisted the ideology of being “civilized”, beyond recognition! Tell me we should work hard and look forward to a world with full of nude where everybody is free to do whatever they wish, I may agree with you. But don’t tell me it is okay to go topless as long as you put on your panties. That doesn’t make sense.
Obviously, people like you are promoting nudity and fornication in the name of freedom and gender equality. And especially when it comes to women, although the proclaimed objective is to safeguard women and their sexuality, you people are effectively making them sex objects.
It is ironic to see how you brushed the tradition of wearing saris as Indian import and yet preach the Sri Lankans to give way for the western culture of mini skirts.
I am sure the number of “Gypsys” in Sri Lanka is growing and growing fast as everywhere else in the world, but don’t make mistake, all these are to the detriment of human values and development. Analyze the facts with a clean and clear mind, the west is an evident.
I can only feel pity for those who call this trend, civility. Because the history says that we have been there already!
P.S. I am extremely sorry to have used raw language.
Wow, very eloquently put Chaminda.
I didn’t know homosexual acts are illegal in SL still. India has just corrected themselves. Also, I may be wrong so please correct me, but someone told me that rape is lawful within a marriage in SL?
In SL, the source of this backwardness is it is thought acceptable for people to ‘own’ other people – what they think, what they wear, who they sleep with, who they marry. The entire society owns you, so to speak. Almost always it is the older people who are deemed to own the younger people. And so we never progress because an outdated mindset is passed down through the generations. It is like a silent-Talibanic society hiding under the cloak of ‘tradition’. It is like unless you have adopted the passed-down prejudices you are considered to be ‘unpatriotic’. You are also identified by an accident of birth, rather than what you have become through your own learning, experience and through your subsequent convictions.
I think all this will change in the next decades – with mass communications, easier travel, and the internet. Don’t forget that the present ruling Talibanic society grew up in SL at a time when (1) few got to go abroad – you rarely met another person who had ever met a non-Ceylonese (2) there was no television! and (3) of course no internet. Sri Lankan people had little opportunity to exchange ideas with non Sri Lankans. Consequently even what they regard as ‘knowledge’ is an uncorroborated narrow view – it says more about what they don’t know than what they actually know.
Overall Chaminda I agree with what you say. Sri Lanka is still an oppressive place for women. We are far from gender equality or anything approaching a healthy sexuality. The actions of the present government as you say certainly do not help matters.
Where I will take issue is in the latent assumption that somehow in the West women are liberated. In the commercialized cultures of the West, women’s sexuality has become a product – objectified. Sex is used to sell all manner of goods and popular fashion is simply a reflection of this commercialization of women’s sexuality.
In the West if you are not thin or you do not have the right curves, or you do not wear the right (sexualized) attire then you are a loser. This is part of the reason why women, particularly those approaching middle age, tend to have a lot of psychological issues as well. Plastic surgery, all manner of eating disorders, faddish diet plans, and an obsession with form are some of the results.
I do agree on balance however that the West is a more liberated place than Sri Lanka for women. However it should not be made a model uncritically. The right to have sex, the right to dress as you please, are important, but the bottom line is human freedom.
I think neither the commercialized-sexualized culture of the west or the sexually repressive culture of Sri Lanka are models of human or womens freedom.
Sexuality should not be treated as a bar of choclate you can buy at the convenience shop. When it is treated that way women are the first ones to suffer, from abuse, from unwanted pregnancies, from STD’s, from emotional difficulties.
A sound dose of morality, common sense and family values is important in helping young women and men understand that sexaulity is not a toy, that their bodies and minds are also not toys so that they can grow up in a wholesome way unmarred by abuse or repression.
A culture of restraint and elegance perhaps is an apt description of a culture beyond sexual-commericalism and sexual repression.
Dear Reza,
Promoting gender equality, sexual freedom and the legal recognition of homosexuality does not represent a promotion of ‘nudity’ and ‘fornication’. The views you express sum up a set of attitudes strongly upheld by a lot of Sri Lankans, – and very unfortunately, these attitudes prevent us from moving forward as a nation.
Liberté – that word means what is means. I am not saying that going topless in one’s panties is the right thing to do, but if someone wishes to do so, that person should have the right to do so – and no one, simply no one can deny that right. Don’t be afraid of sexual freedom and gender equality – it does not make a society one with loose morals – on the contrary, it re-establishes morality in a non-offensive and respectful mannerism.
Concerning saris- I am not ‘preaching Sri Lankans to give way for the Western culture of mini-skirts’. Please travel a little around Asia, and you will notice that there exists a universally accepted form of convenient office clothes for men and women. The so-called ‘Western office attire’ is no longer ‘Western’ but universal. It is much more convenient and dress code equality at the work place is a very important point in promoting gender equality in Sri Lanka. The moment I mention ‘decent western dress’, you come out with ‘mini-skirts’. That unfortunately demonstrates the extent of the ‘malaise” I am referring to in the article. If it is acceptable for a man to go to work in ordinary office attire, it is undeniable that a woman should enjoy the exact same right.
You seem to see ‘human values and development’ in saris and covering women’s bodies. This is the place where the nation has gone radically wrong. Don’t link human values with a woman’s attire. A woman has the right to dress the way she likes, and whatever a woman wears, that should not be a concern for anybody. Concerning your pun on ‘Gypsies’ I refrain from commenting, as it is an extremely shameless, unsophisticated and rash statement that deserves nothing but contempt.
Dear Manjula,
Thanks for the insightful comment and I do see your concerns as crucial concerns. Commercialisation of sexuality is a global phenomenon, and is not limited to one part of the world. This has little to do with increased gender equality, sexual freedom, the recognition of homosexuality and granting women (and men) the fullest control over their sexuality. You mention abuse, unexpected pregnancies and STDs – and the one and only effective method of tackling these is more openness to sexuality and sexual education. In places where the level of sexual education is high, the rate of teenage & unexpected pregnancies, STDs and violence against women remain remarkably low (for a fine illustration, see http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article5208865.ece). In some places, such as the United Kingdom where there are major lacuna in this area, teenage pregnancies remain quite high – hence nation-wide programmes such as Channel 4′s ‘Sexperience’ (http://sexperienceuk.channel4.com/)
Concerning our land, what we need is complete and quintessential sexual freedom (especially for women) and large-scale projects of sex education – which are targeted at enabling both men AND women live their sexuality in a sane and fulfilling manner.
Dear Vivi,
Thanks a million for your comment. A comment of this nature from you means a lot to me, and in all your good endeavors at making our society a better places, it goes without saying that I am with you. Those who hide behind the ‘culture tag’ to propagate views of this nature are very, very dangerous to our society, and they are the last folks we need.
Dear Gypsy,
Thanks for the comment and the link. I was delighted to browse through your blog, and will indeed visit it regularly. Please don’t be concerned about the negative comments, and even when Sri Lanka eventually becomes a more accommodative society at some stage in future, negative, far-right wing and conservative views will always keep on knocking around….but we must definitely make sure that the ‘significance’ of such views is dramatically reduced, and that they are completely marginalized. I want the land I was born in to have a modern, righteous, and broad-minded society, where women’s rights are duly respected, people are not discriminated for their sexuality, and where freedom of expression reigns. We cannot envision a better future for Sri Lanka without reaching these goals. I am sure you (and many other Sri Lankans at home and abroad) agree with this view, and collective hard work will doubtlessly take us there.
I was extremely proud of you when I read your article, and I wish you all the very best with your work as a journalist.
I agree with the writer and fully share his concerns about so-called culture being used for control over large sections of our society.
In a comment to the original submission by Gypsy Bohemia, I called this the Talibanisation of Sri Lankan society. Since this is being done in the name of Sinhala Buddhism. I suggested that we might called it Budu-ban. Some illiterate person got it mixed up with Budu bana, which literally means the Buddha’s teachings.
Let’s be clear. What’s happening has little or nothing to do with real Buddhism. We now seem to have in Sri Lanka a peculiar brand of Buddhism very different to what the Buddha himself preached! But as we have seen with Christian and Islamic fundamentalism, all it takes is a small but vocal and extremist group to hijack, distort and abuse the original teachings of their faith for their own selfish, narrow ends. That’s precisely what is happening in Sri Lanka, and thus we see the rise of the Budu-ban.
The irony is that the Buddhists all over the world were appalled when the Taliban dynamited and destroyed the Banian Buddha statues in Afghanistan. Yet some of the same Buddhists are now cheering and supporting the rise of an equally sinister kind of fundamentalism in their own faith.
By the way, for those who wonder what my own labels are, I am a woman not owned by anyone, and not belonging to the majority ethnic group. I practise no religion and am equally suspicious of all religions. And I have great legs…
Chaminda responds in detail to comments on this article left on the Groundviews Facebook Fan Page.
If you aren’t a member, join up now through your PC or text “fan groundviews” to 32665 from your mobile phone.
ha ha ho ho
It’s hard to turn the beat around now, eh? Bare breasted women were rampant in sri lanka up to the mid 20th century. I do not think the Buddhist monks had any problem with nudity-even female nudity-at that time. People who have never experienced village life will be surprised to see men and women bathing together in rivers, streams and wells unhampered by false modesty even today in Sri-Lanka. Before the Ceylonese were attacked by a sore case of Victorianitis, they viewed nudity and the human body as a natural process of life. As the “savages ” did not care for any concept that even remotely resembles ‘original sin’ they did not suffer from the types of sexual repression that has afflicted certain segments of society today.
Oh the “civilized” chaps and gals of Sri-Lanka, how they taunted the Kandyans! With polyandry being a part of Kandyan society at that time, the “civilized” were simply appalled by these “immoral” Kandyan women.
God only knows (if there is one) now that the Buddhist monks too have joined the ranks of the “civilized”, it is damn tough reverting back to the good ol’ days !
To the Buddhist monks, I say to you: this is not a popularity contest. By joining the “civilized” crew, you fellows have put your own people up for ransom.
Oh monks ! Can’t you see?
The “civilized” are distancing themselves from you as we speak.
Why did you sell out in this manner?
Can’t you see…because of your stupidity in aspiring for mediocre middle-class trinkets, you have to take the final fall.
Dear Mr. Chaminda,
Thank you very much for your response and I do recognize and respect your out going concern. The challenger can take it any way, he or she wants, but I like to be provocative and I believe that it warrants a strong answers to your questions and most of all helps reveal the real identity of the person with whom you are talking.
I am not an extremist or stumble-block for progress but a young man in search of answers and truth. When you say “I am not saying that going topless in one’s panties is the right thing to do, but if someone wishes to do so, that person should have the right to do so – and no one, simply no one can deny that right” and again “the use of the pill, the morning after pill and the female condom should be widely popularised in Sri Lanka, so that young women can freely live their sexuality” honestly, I don’t get the thread here. If your wife or the fourteen year old daughter wishes to go naked on the street, want you have anything to say? Will you be happy to be in a state where in every morning you have to remind your office going wife and school going daughters about their pills because otherwise they will come home pregnant! To me, these sounds extremely scary, absolutely immoral and a recipe for total disaster.
I am not an enemy of freedom, any culture or religion, but for that matter I can not raise my hands to say yes to the notion of turning this plant a completely free and shameless place.
Never doubt that a small, group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. -Margaret Mead
Dear Reza,
Thanks for the comment.
You seem to see a clear danger in making our society more ‘open’ when it comes to sexuality and gender issues. I understand your views, and accept the fact that a large number of Sri Lankans harbour similar views.
But this has little do with what I mentioned. Creating a social landscape where women (and men) of all sexual orientations can live a sane sexuality does not result in a society with loose morals. Your argument seems to equate lack of morality with sexual freedom. This, in my view, is a very wrong assumption.
Contrary to popular beliefs, extensive freedom is not going to have the above-mentioned negative effect. On the contrary, it gives people the courage and willingness to live their sexual lives in a healthy and sane manner. More sexual freedom is not going to result in unexpected pregnancies or STDs. These are issues that need to be dealt with sound sex education right from early adolescence.
Secondly, you mention ‘wives’. If someone is legally married to someone, it means that they have decided to tie a strong knot, and if the relationship works well, neither partner will be bothered seeking anything elsewhere. This is universally applicable.
Concerning 14-year-olds, it goes without saying that this age needs to be marked by clear, detailed, precise and consistent sexual education, not the traditional values and morals etc.etc. that are fed into the majority of young Sri Lankan girls of that age. There is no harm in a woman living her sexuality once she reaches adulthood (in many cases, this is after the age of 18, and in some societies, the legal age for consent for sex is 16 – I do not see a problem here, only if there is a strong structure of sex education in place.
More openness does not make a society barbaric or ‘wild’ – it only results in a society composed of people with healthy bodies and minds, who know their bodies, are in control of them, and possess a higher capability of making the right choices. Now these ideas need not be categorized as ‘Western’. These are applicable to any society, and especially to ours. The objective is not following something available elsewhere blindly – the sincere objective is making our society a better one, where equality and respect are the primary norms.
Dear Mr. Chaminda,
Thank you again for your response.
To me, having sex is THE MOST sacred, fascinating and blissful act which so far has kept at least the planet Earth lively. My understanding and worry is that although we have already tempered it to a great extend we shouldn’t end up further precipitating the situation in the name sexual freedom. What if a man wishes to marry a donkey? Will it have marked the limit of sexual freedom? You may say I am going wild but that is where precisely the so-called absolute sexual freedom seems to be pointing.
Look at the carnage and chaos which has been brought by HIV, results of a venomous sexual experiment against nature? Imagine a totally sexually conducive world with another couple of HIV like viruses!
NO, opting to create a free place to play, the strong knots and sexual education that you talked about for the young, goes over my head!
The bottom line for me is that fornication must be discouraged at all cost and by all means. As everything else in the universe, the human life and way of living also must be governed by a set of rules and regulations other wise we are are destined for a free fall.
Chaminda,
I quite agree with you that a woman’s sexuality is not to be defined by the state and for that matter is not the business of religious leaders and boys’ clubs (of course the government, too, is a boys’ club). Also, one should bear in mind that she is to decide whether she wants to have sex or not – regardless of whether it is to be with a man or another woman. No one can force her to have children because ultimately her body belongs to her – not to any external authority.
Now, let me get to the origins of the ‘white sheet virginity test’. I am sure you and many other respondents to Grounds View are familiar with the constant references to such white sheet/handkerchief tests in Renaissance Literature. Going back a little further, chastity belts were also a part of medieval western society. To the sophisticated Ladies and Gentlemen who are regular readers of Grounds View, I am sure you are relieved our colonizers did not force that weird contraption called the ‘chastity belt’ on us! However, I sometimes feel that certain men must be locked up in this manner, and the key thrown away for good.
In matriarchal societies, for example, like in the Kandyan society, there were even trial marriages that gave the woman and man freedom to assess the compatibility of their marriage partners. There was no stigma attached to this, and the woman was free to go and find a man more to her liking. This scenario made our colonizers go into fits of anxiety, and they decided it was high time the natives were brought into the fold of “civilization” . Now Ladies and Gents, tell me who introduced the white sheet to the natives? This is not a parting shot at the KKK, but a reference to the ‘white sheet virginity test’ that you spoke of.
Now, there is another bizarre phenomenon that is slowly taking root in Sri-Lankan Buddhist temples. Like in the Catholic Orthodox church in Greece where women are given long sleeved shirts upon entering the premises, Buddhist temples – especially the Maligawa – is insisting that women and men cover up their bare arms and legs. My, my, aren’t we Sri-Lankans good at blindly aping the West!
I am sure that upon big Pharma’s insistence, the Sri-Lankan government will insist that girls as young as nine should be given Gardasil – the vaccination for the human papillomavirus. Will condom machines in high schools be the next “in” thing? Where is this going to stop?
If I may hazard a guess, this Pandora’s Box will hit bottom only when the West talks about abstinence as a healthy alternative. Please don’t think abstinence equals a prudish attitude towards sex. I can just picture in my mind all the “sophisticated” Ladies and Gents of Sri-Lanka crying: “Okay, the white man has given us the green light. Can’t you see, man, reverse, reverse !
Cheelanka, your bigotry towards Buddhists is getting old.
It has been a very interesting experience to read this piece and the comments about it. Thank you to everybody.
Mr. Reza expresses some very common anxieties felt when it comes to the changing roles of women and evolving views of sexuality and freedom. His anxieties have been felt in all cultures throughout history. Even in the West many still express these fears.
But let’s get away from theory and look at reality. I’m a man living in a medium-sized town in Sri Lanka. I’m in a particularly conservative area, where people are ruled by “tradition” in almost everything, including dress, sexuality, the whole nine yards. I have many male friends, but few female ones so I can’t speak authoritatively about the female side of the equation.
The truth is that despite all the traditional cultural do’s and don’ts, every kind of sexual act, and every variation it, takes place in my town. Everything from the mundane; homosexuality, nudism, porn parties, to the very harmful: incest, rape, bestiality, and everything in between. It happens, despite it not being “our culture,” despite it not being “traditional.” And no amount of ignoring them will make any of these things go away.
And in the meantime, there is a high rate of sexually transmitted diseases, and a lively illegal abortion industry. Still no AIDS yet, thank God!
So the realistic, practical thing to do is to educate, to instill a sense of personal responsibility, and to teach people to understand that just because the CAN do something doesn’t mean they HAVE to. With freedom comes responsibility .
They’re going to do it anyway.
Hand-in-hand with this is teaching people not to judge a book by it’s cover.
Where I live, a woman who wears trousers, no matter how loose and baggy, is assumed to be a whore. It reaches ridiculous levels: I know one Western woman who could barely talk with men because everyone (especially the town’s women) assumed she is trying to seduce them (the guys could only wish!). Meanwhile a woman who lived in a nearby Muslim community and was very proper (entirely covered in black and so on) turned out to be sleeping with, apparently, half the men in town! Meanwhile my Western friend was being semi-ostracized because she was wearing those baggy pants. (BTW, she has since given in and switched entirely to long skirts. She’s more “acceptable” now. People will look her in the face when talking to her.)
So while I understand Mr. Reza’s misgivings, I don’t agree with them. All the kinds of stuff he fears; loose sexuality, brazenness, diseases, etc. are already here. The only difference is that it all happens under the guise of culture and tradition.
Which brings up my final point. The Western way of dealing with these issues isn’t perfect. But at least it’s more honest than what we have here. Here, as long as someone looks and seems to act according to culture and tradition (and the general population doesn’t find out), no one bothers them. It’s only the act of seeming to be non-traditional that REALLY bothers people. That’s why my Western friend, who never did anything sexual with anyone, could be treated like a whore, whereas the properly dressed woman from the nearby town could wench her way through the male population, and no one make a fuss.