©The
Star (Used by permission)
Musings by Marina Mahathir
The world is too dangerous, therefore women should be kept at home to be safe.
Such logic smacks of a patriarchal attitude that is so prevalent in our society;
that women cannot fend for themselves and need to be ‘protected’.
IN MY last column I wrote about the need to revamp entire political structures
to incorporate more women into decision–making structures. There was absolutely
no reaction whatsoever. It might have been too shocking a suggestion, despite
the fact that half of our population are women.
The idea of putting women in true leadership positions, where they lead all
Malaysians, not just women, must have seemed too radical to even contemplate.
This week we find ourselves with the very reason why this must happen.
In response to the recent spate of young women being caught overseas for
smuggling drugs, the Foreign Minister, along with the Home Minister, intended to
propose to the Cabinet that all women travelling alone must get their families’
consent.
(The Foreign Minister subsequently clarified the proposal was only meant for
those below 21 years old. However, the Prime Minister has shot the idea down. –
Editor)
It is extremely revealing that neither minister saw fit to consult the Women,
Family and Community Development Minister on this issue.
Is this because they forgot there is such a minister? Do they view the Women,
Family and Community Development Ministry as some junior inconsequential
ministry that cannot make “important” decisions like this? Small wonder women
have not gotten very far at all.
This “brilliant” proposal requiring women travelling alone to get consent before
they do so brings up many questions.
Say this was, by the biggest stretch of the imagination, an appropriate thing to
do, how would anyone implement it? Would Immigration officers be required to
check that each young woman travelling has a letter of consent?
With our new smart passports, we don’t even talk to any Immigration officer.
Will we now see women forced to forgo the machines and queue up instead?
At heart it smacks of a patriarchal attitude that is so prevalent in our
society; that women cannot fend for themselves and need to be “protected”. But
that protection entails curbing women’s freedom for “their own good”.
That was exactly the logic the Taliban used to keep women at home. The world is
just too dangerous. Therefore women should be kept at home to be safe, even
though this curbs their access to education, employment and even healthcare.
It’s the same mentality that says that women should be told to cover up so that
they won’t get raped, or not carry handbags so that those won’t be snatched. Or
that books should be banned so that people don’t get ideas that “may” be
dangerous.
It’s a mentality that accepts that the world is a bad place and, worse still,
nothing can be done about it. Criminals roam free so people must curb their own
freedoms so that they would never get in the way of these bad people. Men are
inclined to rape, so women must never provoke them.
Funnily enough, nobody suggests that for the protection of women, men should be
locked up since they make up the majority of rapists, bag snatchers, thieves and
murderers. This is a real indictment of the police since we seem to accept that
they are incapable of doing their jobs.
This mentality pervades all levels of society in every way. We have so little
confidence in our own people that we imagine that at the slightest opportunity,
they will, in a very childlike way, become influenced.
I attended a forum on the banning of books and heard one person say that we
should not allow certain books to be sold because our children might read them.
I had to wonder whether he meant orphaned children with no parents or any
responsible adult to guide them or all children. Why do we forget about our own
responsibilities to teach our children the right values so that they can judge
for themselves?
Sometimes I think we don’t want to do the right thing because it is too hard.
Educating people to be more savvy about the people they meet, to be more alert
when they travel, to be more critical about what they read are all the tools we
need to protect our people, including women and children.
But it’s not easy and it takes time before we see the results. Still, that
doesn’t mean we should not do it. Just because we still have car accidents does
not mean we should stop road safety campaigns; nor should we ban cars.
Our officials can avoid these types of silly proposals if only they thought of
consulting people and getting realistic feedback.
They should consult a wide range of people and then weigh what should be done.
They should look at empirical data and see which groups of people are
particularly vulnerable. Then, and only then, should they respond.
If an alarming number of women are being duped into criminal activity, then we
should be educating women about it with suggestions on how to avoid this folly.
Sensational stories in the newspapers alone won’t do it.
A knee–jerk response, again
7 May 2008 12:00 am