Let's not skirt around this issue but your dress cannot be, never was and never will be your choice

Businesswoman Esther Akoth 'Akothee' visits parliament

Towards the end of last year, Esther Akoth-popularly known as “Akothee” visited parliament buildings in Nairobi but was barred from entry. Reason? She was “improperly” dressed — in a mini skirt.

Rather than call the police or arrest her for conspiracy to corrupt public morals, MP David ole Sankok braved the stigma of her presence and only fled for cover when female members of parliament led by MP Soitan Tuya dashed out with a Lesso and covered her “nakedness”!

I later learnt she had gone to parliament to lobby for support for the launch of her “Akothee Foundation.” Whether she got the support she was looking for or not is another matter. The matter here is your dress cannot be, never was and never will be your choice.

Occasions, institutions and common sense are what demand and shape our dress code. There is a dress code everywhere; from the bedroom to the boardroom. Forget the old adage about books and covers; you can actually judge a book by its cover where humans are concerned. Businesses, hotels and schools enforce dress codes to promote the values or morals of a company, prevent distractions in the classroom, etc. Top drawer hotels discourage women dressed in a certain way. Reason? The mere presence of such women, so dressed, devalue the stature, grade, and reputation of the hotel.

Issues of provocative dressing have over the years been about women. Until the millennials, there were hardly any concerns about men being indecently dressed. Not any more. Society has recently been treated to nervous moments by the appearances of young men exposing their underwear above tattered jeans.

All religions have strict dress rules. Islam recommends for women to wear a hijab at all times while in public as part of Islamic standards of modesty. Male members of the Sikh religion are required to wear a turban at all times. Modesty in dressing is virtuous. If everybody wore anything anywhere, anytime, the chaos would be worse than Covid-19 or even 20.

It is why every profession has its own dress code. A certain senior lawyer once appeared before a judge dressed in a mini skirt. When she rose to address the court, the judge told her, “Counsel, I don’t hear you.” Being a seasoned advocate, she knew exactly what the judge meant. She carried her files and left in a huff. She promptly returned in the afternoon, this time dressed in a micro mini skirt, to spite the judge. The gracious judge ignored her daring outfit and “heard her”. The advocate later joined the bench as a senior Judge but left in shame. Her stint as a judge was as brief as a mini skirt.

In his hey days, even Idd Amin issued a decree which outlawed mini skirts in Uganda. His reasoning, which for once should resonate with right thinking members of the public, was that minis were indecent and eroded the morals of the country. Earlier in the day, Ngwazi Hastings Dr. Kamuzu Banda of Malawi had banned the Mini Skirt. He considered it an affront to the moral edict of Malawi.

In Western Kenya, there once lived a spiritual and moral leader called Elijah Masinde of Dini Ya Musambwa. Ever the moral cop, he rued indecent dressing and was quick with his stick on women who appeared in public dressed “badly”.

Every profession and institution have their dress mannerisms either expressly outlined or implied. Even the most passionate crusader of My Dress, My Choice Movement cannot dare march on a church dressed in a bikini or some revealing outfit. And why not? Everyone knows it is abominable, improper and an assault on the hallowed reverence of the Church to saunter in with an exposed thigh.

One cannot choose to dress as they please. It is self-censorship.
In sporting, each sport has their unique dress code. What to wear is not the choice of an individual player. Basketball kits cannot be worn by Tennis players, etc. or swimming costume by footballers. It is not a matter of choice.
Wedding ceremonies have known dress code for the celebrants. Now, a wedding is a most important, colourful occasion in the life of a woman, any woman.

Yet during weddings, the bride is veiled from head to toe, hardly exposing an ounce of flesh to the public. In fact the longer the veil, the merrier. In some traditions in Kenya, a group of girls are kept together, all covered and the groom asked to pick out his bride from the jumble. White wedding gowns symbolizing purity and decency are the norm. When does this craving for exposing body parts begin?

When does the advertisement of curves, backsides and bottoms begin? Even in death, we don’t burry our dead with an exposed buttock. We give them “decent” send-off. You don’t want to appear before St. Peter in your underwear, do you?

NOI Poll, a polling agency in West Africa in a 2013 survey on causes of rape records that 34 per cent of the people believe that indecent dressing contributes to incidents of rape. A UK study in 2018 drew similar conclusions, with 55 per cent believed that “The more revealing the clothes a woman wears, the more likely it is that she will be harassed or assaulted”. Interestingly, 41 per cent of women held the same view which is often described as a “myth”.

Sharon Lennon and a group of other scholars did a content analysis of various research that has examined a link between sex and dressing.  The studies they analysed was carried out over a 50 year period ending in 2015 and led to the propagating of various theories. A review of these research works shows that mankind has hardly evolved in the way they view dressing as a signal of intent or in the use of dress as signal of intent.  Their findings conclude: “It is clear that dress is used to infer a range of information about sex. They added: “Researchers have demonstrated that revealing dress evokes objectification of the woman so dressed.”

SlutWalk Protest Marches (Women dressed as sluts) of 2011 in Canada against rape are further confirmation of the link between dress and rape. Time to re-look at our own Sexual Offences Act. As Judge Azdak in the “Caucasian Chalk Circle” would find, many unfortunate men are assaulted and raped by women wearing and carrying dangerous weapons. It is contributory negligence….

All the world is a stage and we the actors. If you’ve ever watched the rehearsal process of a play, then you know just how powerful clothes are. It’s amazing to see how the right clothes bring the performances up to a whole new level and transform the actor into the character! Your dress, your choice? Wrong!

Your clothes and presentation communicate volumes about you as a person. The question is not whether you care about opinions, it’s more about what you’re communicating intentionally or unconsciously through your dress choices. Just as the actor in the right costume moves and speaks differently, so does the everyday person by how and what they dress.

— Kutete-Matimbai is a lawyer and child protection officer based in Bungoma
Email: [email protected]