I refer to the letter Decent dressing: What are the parameters? The writer is slightly confused. If one accepts that there is a point where too little dress can pose a problem thus justifying a regulation, then equally one must accept regulations when too much dress creates a problem.

The principle is that there is no such thing as absolute freedom even in the 'freest' of democracies. Any degree of nudity in public places is prohibited even in the most liberal counties of the West.

The argument for regulation of minimal dress is universally accepted although the stipulation for what is minimal is the point at issue. The mullahs in Kota Baru want the 'tudung'. And some individuals in Western counties want to wear the 'hijab' and the veil.

The objection is to social segregation and communication. In societies where the eyes and facial expressions are used to convey thoughts and feeling along with speech, there is a problem when individuals cover themselves up to a point when meaningful interaction becomes impossible.

Even in Malaysia we consider such dressing extreme. Such dressing also constitutes an attitude towards women which is repugnant in the West and quite possibly here as well. And I think that that is the real problem.

At the heart of those who advocate such dress is the desire for the segregation of women from men in society which proceeds from at attitude towards women's status. The West has come a long way in empowering women and in giving them their rightful place in society. There is an unwillingness to allow one section of their society to be denied those rights.