Let's ponder on this

The summer season has arrived and sermons dedicated to the women dress code are already circulating on social media.

Understand me, my article does not, in any way, suggest that we have to be happy with clothes that reveal private parts or encourage indecency.

What I am advocating for is a fair reconsideration of how women’s dress is perceived and regulated, particularly when it comes to garments like the miniskirt, which have long been subjected to scrutiny and moral policing. Dressing is a personal act that combines individual expression, culture and societal norms. Evangelist Linda Dlamini has already expressed disgust and concern over miniskirts and shorts that women in Manzini particularly put on during the hottest period of the year. 

Augustina John writes that, over the decades, men around the world have run with a widely-held assumption that when ladies put the effort into looking nice, they are doing it primarily to attract.

John states that, as a matter of fact, when people, especially men, see a lady looking elegant in public, some of them summon the audacity to ask questions like ‘who is the lucky man?’  I agree with John that, overtly and covertly, women have been categorised as objects of appeal for men to ogle, like chicken wings in a show glass or dolphins in an aquarium.

In Africa where patriarchy holds sway, the common assertion is that ladies wear their Friday evening best just so they can capture the eyes of the men in the rooms they plan to step into. While these wrong perceptions are conceived on a daily basis, I must state that counsellors taught me that sexual dimorphism sign displayed by the sisters of Eve are attractive for intelligent men because they do not see them as just other humans but as women. I then wonder what kind of men do not want to admire the beauty of the people made by God to show men the right path. From society to society, there are parts of the body which when a woman displays, men realises the greatness of God.

Women must feel free to display them because they reveal how almighty God carefully and specially designed a woman. Is Eswatini with me? As long as those clothes do not reveal what God concealed when Adam and Eve realised that they were naked, they are, therefore, at liberty to show off their beautiful legs and thighs. If we are to force our women to wear what men want because of their eyes which they fail to turn away from evil, we will end up telling bank tellers not to count money in our presence because we see it with our eyes. I am aware that eyes are a powerful gateway to the soul as they either lead us to Godly or evil things. However, if we are to be controlled by untrained eyes, we will oftentimes break the law. If thighs are not supposed to be shown in public, why then are female soccer players wearing shorts during games?

Women have designed their own pants which we cannot wear as men. Therefore, let us allow them to wear those pants.

I do not understand why certain institutions do not allow them to put on formal pants during office hours. This is wrong. There are many advantages for pants. 

In 2012, we saved a woman near Eswatini College of Technology who was pulled to the ground by a man who attempted to rape her. As we approached the scene, which was on our way to church, we noticed that the man was struggling to remove the young woman’s tight jeans. As they wrested, he ran away after seeing us running towards them. I am happy that I threw a stone at him and it caught him.  

We are a civilised society.  We have to allow our women and young girls to wear these tight jeans. They are helpful, not only for such situations, but they are good for their bodies as they look attractive in them.

The miniskirt reveals ‘all the beauty in a woman.’ To appreciate the defiance and empowerment associated with the miniskirt, one must look back to its origins in the 1960s.

British designer Mary Quant is often credited with inventing the miniskirt, a garment that revolutionised women’s fashion and symbolised rebellion against restrictive social norms. According to Quant in her autobiography ‘Miniskirts, My Life, My Style’, the miniskirt was ‘a statement of freedom, mobility and independence.’

It was not merely about showing skin, but about reclaiming autonomy over one’s body and choices. As American feminist writer Gloria Steinem once noted; ‘The miniskirt is not a sign of vulgarity or a decline in morals, but of women breaking free from constrictive societal expectations.’

Steinem’s words resonate today, especially as voices attempt to impose dress codes that shame and silence women rather than respect their rights. Across the globe, many voices have expressed support for women’s rights to dress as they choose, arguing that blaming women’s attire for social ills is both misguided and harmful. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, the Nigerian author and feminist, has spoken powerfully about the importance of allowing women to make their own decisions without being judged or policed. In her influential book ‘We Should All Be Feminists’, she writes: “A feminist is a person who believes in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes. Part of feminist practice is rejecting the idea that women must conform to prescribed standards of dress or behaviour.”

In an interview, Chimamanda once said: “Nobody should tell you how to dress, you dress to express who you want to be.”

In South Africa, women activists have spoken against the way dress codes are disproportionately enforced on women, both in schools and the workplace.

They argue that such restrictions entrench sexism and infringe on fundamental freedoms. In an article published in The South African, one of them remarked: “Dress codes send a message to young girls that their bodies are inherently sexual and must be hidden, rather than educating boys and men to respect boundaries and consent.”

Echoing this, gender rights advocate Naledi Dlamini noted in a panel discussion hosted by the Women’s Legal Centre: “The problem is not what a woman wears but the attitude society holds towards women’s autonomy. Policing dress codes reinforces harmful stereotypes and perpetuates victim blaming.”

In Eswatini, where tradition and modernity intersect in complex ways, dress codes often carry moral and cultural weight.

I have observed that sermons urging women to dress ‘decently’ frequently appear at the start of summer and these messages circulate widely via social media.

While respecting cultural and religious values is important, imposing rigid dress codes mostly targets female expression and freedom. The message often implies that women who wear shorter skirts or revealing clothing invite disrespect, harassment and even violence, thus shifting blame from perpetrators onto victims. It is vital to challenge this narrative. Condemning a garment such as the miniskirt rather than addressing attitudes that normalise gender-based violence or harassment is ineffective and unjust.

The continuous policing of women’s clothing breeds shame, fear and self-censorship. Many women choose to dress conservatively not out of personal style, but out of fear of criticism or social backlash.

impacts

One acclaimed psychologist explained in a recent interview: “The control of women’s dress can lead to reduced self-esteem and limit their participation in public life. When women are told repeatedly that their outfits are ‘provocative’ or ‘inappropriate’, it internalises a sense of guilt and restriction.”

I have noted that such psychological impacts contribute to broader gender inequality, reinforcing the idea that women’s bodies are the focus of moral scrutiny rather than agents of their own choices. Internationally, women’s dress is protected as a form of personal freedom and expwression in various human rights frameworks.

The United Nations’ Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which Eswatini has ratified, implicitly supports women’s rights to make autonomous decisions about their attire without discrimination or harassment. In her report on gender and dress codes, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, Dubravka Šimonovic, stated: “Dress codes that target women are often rooted in stereotypes and have the effect of limiting women’s equal participation in public and private life.”

This legal lens invites Eswatini and other nations to reconsider how dress codes are framed and enforced, prioritising dignity, equality and respect for personal choice.

For many women, the miniskirt is more than just a fashion choice, but a symbol of empowerment and freedom. It challenges conservative norms and asserts women’s rights to define their own identities.

As South African singer and feminist Miriam Makeba once said: “The way a woman dresses is a form of rebellion, an artistic expression and a declaration of who she is.”

This sentiment holds true for many young women today who wear miniskirts as a celebration of their bodies and their liberation from outdated restrictions.

Put on the miniskirt, I say, not as an invitation to indecency, but as a rallying call to embrace self-expression, challenge double standards and break free from the shackles of dress policing. Instead of sermons that shame women, let us foster dialogue that respects autonomy, condemns harassment regardless of attire and promotes equality. The miniskirt is not the problem, but the problem is with the person who sees a problem in the miniskirt.

Of course, the problem lies in the mindset that undermines women’s freedom to choose how they present themselves in the world.

What I am advocating for is a fair reconsideration of how women’s dress is perceived and regulated, particularly when it comes to garments like the miniskirt. (Pic: Sarah Crego)