I refer to the letter Women:'Behave like trash be treated like trash' .

It appears, from the various letters written by malaysiakini readers, that the Kota Baru Municipal Council has indeed made a popular decision with regard to stipulating a form of acceptable dress for the state's womenfolk. That the Taliban government of Afghanistan enforced a dress code for women and men during their reign of regressive governance probably never emerged in the minds of many people.

Support for Kelantan's dress code is based on three main premisses ie, one, for the safety of women (prevention of rape), two, to induce respect for women thereby ensuring that they are treated properly, and three, from the theocratic angle.

Sociology is the scientific study of human social activity. This issue of a state-wide dress code could be placed in perspective from a sociological standpoint for the reason that the values of a society, in this case Kelantan, is the sum of the values of the denizens of the state.

When human behaviour is analysed from a sociological point of view, the symptom is rarely or in fact never confused with the cause. The causes of dysfunctional human behaviour could be traced to the individual's background, gender, age, ethnicity and current living environment. Note closely that all these factors are personal to an individual either through choice or imposition. The way someone else dresses is not personal to an observing individual.

Hence, the causes of dysfunctional human behaviour are internal whereas symptoms are external. In a potential rape, the symptom is the potential victim's choice of dress whereas the actual cause of rape is the dysfunctional attributes of the perpetrator. To put it in perspective, we could conclude as follows: individuals with dysfunctional attribute A rape women who wear dress B.

How do we ascertain that dressing style is not a cause of rape? The late Noor Suzaily is an example and so is Saudi Arabia which still grapples with rape incidences despite having hudud laws in place and a more restrictive dress code than that required by the Kota Baru Municipal Council.

Another example would be why is it possible for Indian men to not get aroused by the sight of a female Indian traditional dancer's belly whereas males of other ethnicities may not react likewise? As aforementioned, an individual's background is a key factor in analysing dysfunctional behaviour. Indians grow up revering the traditional dances as divine renditions.

This also explains why in the past there were instances where grandmothers aged 70 and older have been raped. Definitely their dressing did not have anything to do with it. Putting it in context, we could prophesise as follows: individuals with dysfunctional behaviour C rape old ladies.

Thus we could go on legislating for donkey's years on women's dress code and not rid our nation of rapes until the causes are addressed. Re-education of future generations of citizens on the fairer sex and their varied attributes would be a good way to start.

With regard to the premise that a dress code inculcates respect for women, again, the symptom has been confused with the cause. The writer's admission that her male friends treat her with respect (presumably in view of her dressing) but are downright obscene with women who are perceived to be dressed indecently is in itself telling. It indicates that these men have a perverted notion (cause of disrespect and a dysfunctional behaviour) that some women are cheap and dirty in view of their dressing (symptom of disrespect).

Finally, the argument for a dress code from a theocratic angle could be appreciated by dogmatic followers of the religion but has absolutely not proven itself worthy in stopping rapes and other dysfunctional behaviour.