Ban Guns to Stop Murder? How About Banning Mini-Skirts to Stop Rape?

If you are a fan of increased gun control and restrictions but you think that banning mini-skirts to stop rape sounds as ridiculous as it is, perhaps you can at least step back and see some of the frustrations opponents of increased gun restrictions face when trying to argue against emotion and poor reasoning.

This isn't a post about gun control, although its lessons can be correlated to the subject. This is a post about two tyrannical governments, Swaziland, an absolute monarchy in  sub-Saharan Africa, and Indonesia, a republic in name, but with large theocratic characteristics, and their inability to rationally define the problem of rape in their respective nations.

In November, after a number of gang rapes of young women in Swaziland, over 1000 women attempted to march in protest and to demand better protection from and prosecution of rape. In a brazenly inept understanding of the cause of rape, which is much more about control than about sex, police announced that they would enforce a colonial law from 1889 that bans mini-skirts. The justification given by the police spokesperson was that when wearing mini-skirts, "The act of the rapist is made easy, because it would be easy to remove the half-cloth worn by the women" and "I have read from the social networks that men and even other women have a tendency of 'undressing people with their eyes'. That becomes easier when the clothes are hugging or are more revealing." The ban also applies to shirts that reveal the midriff and even low-rise jeans. The notion that police can stop rape by trying to prevent sexual temptation is a fantastic example of failing to understand and define the problem, as well as the implementation of ineffective solutions that will only lead to more unnecessary rapes and suffering until solutions are finally implemented that actually address the root causes of the problem. The Swaziland example is especially sad given that the ban was in response to a call from the women to identify and address the problem; that demand essentially ended with the government blaming the women and restricting their rights. Sometimes you don't exactly get what you wish for.

Of course, this law doesn't apply to the naked virgins who dance for the king in the marriage ritual. But we all saw that one coming, didn't we?

Indonesia has also threatened to ban mini-skirts, labeling them as pornographic, and thus giving the anti-pornography task force, a component of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, the latitude to prosecute women who wear skirts that end above the knee. A member of Indonesia's House of Representatives, Marzukie Alie, recently contributed his own ignorance to the conversation when he said, "We know that there have been a series of rapes and other immoral acts recently. Those things happened because women don’t dress decently, prompting men to do things.” Brilliant. At least a spokesperson for the National Commission on Violence Against Women was able to contribute some intelligence, when she countered, "Many women [who were] raped happened to wear very conservative clothing. They were raped anyway.'' Nonetheless, it is difficult to have rational discussions about the root causes of the problem when one side of the debate uses pseudo-psychology, emotion, and projects its own misconceptions onto other people.

Nothing like blaming one single factor for an extremely complex problem, right?