Opinion: It's a Dress, NOT a YES

A crime beneath contempt

The focus went to India this week with protests against the gang-rape of a lady of 23 by six presumably drunken men on a bus as punishment for being out in the evening with a man.

She was repeated raped, beaten with rods and thrown off the bus, her companion was also attacked but that lady presently fights for her life.

There are many strands to this story that cannot be dealt with in the strictures of a blog; the cultural, the traditional, the economic, the social and the religious issues are myriad.

No excuse

However, there is one clear narrative that should be declared unassailable all around the globe - that there is no excuse acceptable in humanity and most especially in the 21^st Century that warrants the violation of another human-being in pursuit of some warped notion of deterrence or meting out of punishments to set society to rights.

In the first instance, drunkenness cannot  and must not excuse criminality, it is within the capabilities of people to control their use of alcoholic beverages and moderate the anti-social influences that might result from inebriation.

There is no reason for people to act in mob packs like animals, each one of those men should have and must have known that what they were doing was at first wrong and at best criminal but they might have for some sense of impunity assumed they could get away with their reprehensible acts.

Nothing corrective in rape

The strange entitlement syndrome that allows men to act as if there are society’s female policeman with the right to prejudge, accuse, charge, convict and punish our womenfolk is not only evident in what happened in India, it is pervasive all around the globe in the use of rape as a weapon of war, for the absurd correction of sexual preferences, for Neanderthal gratification without retribution and even for exacting an atrocious societal norm.

There is nothing corrective in rape and there is nothing whatsoever that can place rape in the ambit of anything legally justifiable under any circumstances, no matter how sententious you want to be.

The strange of strangers

That it could be a complete stranger’s business who a lady decides to go out with at any time of the day is bizarre on the face of it.

That the stranger will then act to not just challenge the lady but violate her as if they are acting in the office of society’s disciplinarian for moral infractions beggars belief in the extreme but we see this in too many places and society has been lethargic in rising up against these patently human rights violations.

Even in Nigeria

In the capital city of Nigeria, Abuja, the Abuja Environmental Protection Board has taken on the vile task of corralling any female found in town after a certain hour and branding them prostitutes.

A government organisation suddenly turned vice-squad and moral police that would shame even extreme religious fundamentalists with their egregious abuse of woman rights on the premise that they are keeping the city clean.

Even so

There is no doubt that we all want some standard of morals and modesty on our streets but it is not a licence to exact punitive measures outside the law and in violation of human rights because someone does not conform to our moral standards or prejudicial interpretations of religious texts to dehumanise, persecute, prosecute and censure others.

There is still a principle to abide by – Live and let live.

Remember this

In ending, I remember watching the news yesterday and two placards stood out in the Indian protests.

It’s a dress, not a Yes – This is probably the most succinct protest against rape under the excuse of supposedly indecent dressing.

Don’t teach our girls how to dress, teach our boys not to rape – I will rewrite that in a most categorical declaration – Teach our boys never to rape, whatever the circumstances.

Indecent Exposure Law is good

Flash of flesh

Many a time I have walked down the street and been almost compelled to make a citizen's arrest either with a possible charge of outraging public decency or indecent exposure.

I know I have covered this topic to the point of door-knob boredom, but it matters and it should matter.

Only two days ago, a judge and knight of the realm was cleared of "flashing" on the train in what presumably was a case of mistaken identity, though the accuser is only too convinced that she had her man.

Beyond that, "streaking" would almost certainly get a caution if not a custodial sentence, psychological evaluation might warrant sectioning.

With Summer warming up on us, there would be cases of unacceptable public appearances masquerading as trendy and fashionable when in fact the supposed freedom of expression is no less an obscenity.

See no pants

So, in what is amazingly a rare piece of commonsense values, Delcambre in Louisiana will adopt a law banning the wearing of saggy trousers. I can very well see why the unnecessary exposure of one's underwear or unseemly body parts in places not accorded the right to nudity like a beach or pool should agitate the puritan and the square; it should affect everyone and it should not be condoned.

Some have said the law is racially motivated because this is the kind of fashion of hip hop fans - I would brook none of that - there is no reason for any member of the human race not to appear decently covered in public, regardless of the Emperor's New Clothes we wear as fashion.

In the end, I do not want to see your underwear; the whole reason why it is called underwear is because it should be under your clothes. Then love handles, exposed bellies from ill-fitting cropped tops, if you have no shame, are you game for a police caution and a hefty fine?

This is a law that has come into its time, if we can ban smoking, this would not be a long way off - hopefully.