There’s been a public debate about fashion this month. This
fashion dispute involves allowing Muslim Nurses the right to wear a “Tudong”
(headscarf worn by Malay-Muslim Women) as part of their uniform. The issue was
first raised in Parliament by Mr. Faisal Manap of the Worker’s Party (The
Opposition) and was met with a swift and vigorous reply by the Minister-in-Charge
of Muslim Affairs, Mr. Masagos Zulkifi. The Minister stated that the government
had a clear-cut policy of keeping common spaces secular and Muslim women were
not allowed to wear the tudong because it would mark them out as Muslims, thus
giving patients the ability to choose if they wanted to be treated by a Muslim
or not. More on Masagos’s response to the “tudong” issue can be found at:
After Mr. Masagos came out to say that such sensitive issues
would be discussed behind closed doors and that the government was quite clear
in its stance, Singapore’s “Least” conflicted Minister (the Minister of Law and
Home Affairs), Mr. K. Shanmugam came out to say that it was likely that the
government would be likely to let Muslim nurses wear a “tudong” and that the
government had made the decision some six-months ago. The full story can be
found at:
This incident highlights two serious flaws with the current
system. The most obvious point is that our “famously competent” government is
looking anything but, especially when two ministers have come out to say two
very different things about the same issue. Unfortunately for Mr. Masagos, this
is the second time that he’s been involved in an incident where the government
has been made to look less than competent (April 2020 - https://beautifullyincoherent.blogspot.com/2020/04/the-plights-of-small-business-from-big.html
)
The second point is that this incident underlines the fact
that official claims to fight for equal rights is, well, only when its convenient.
The argument goes that Singapore is officially a secular
state and our national pledge says very clearly, “Regardless of Race, Language
or Religion.” One can freely practice religion in the private space but common
spaces like schools are secular. If you take the government’s official stance, you’re
led to believe that all forms of discrimination are bad and against national
values. Singapore is officially a “meritocracy” that hires solely on ability “regardless
of race, language or religion.”
Mr. Masagos’s argument is that allowing Muslim nurses to
wear the tudong is part of their uniform would go against everything Singapore
officially stands for. It would mark out each “tudong-Wearing” nurse as a
Muslim and it would encourage pro and anti-Muslim sentiment amongst their
patients, which is officially against everything that Singapore stands for.
All this is very well when you look at it through “official”
lenses. However, there is one slight problem with this “anti-tudong” stance. The
ultimate human symbol of the nation, or the president wears a tudong.
What’s particularly interesting is not that our president got
her job because she happened to be the best and most popular candidate who happened
to be a Muslim woman who wears a tudong. Our president was chosen for the job
specifically because she is a Muslim woman who wears a tudong.
Singapore’s Values Expressed in Human Form Chosen Because
She Wears a Tudong
Here lies the inherent contradiction in what the government
is saying. The presidency, which is supposed to be the human embodiment of our
national values is chosen because she happens to wear a tudong and the government
feels that the Malay community need to be represented at the highest office in
the land.
However, at the same time we are saying that you cannot
allow Muslim nurses to wear a tudong because it would mark them out as Muslims
and therefore cause all sorts of strong feelings that would be bad for racial
harmony.
It could be me but it seems that there is a contradiction in
the official stance on certain things. Shouldn’t the government look at trying
to get its basics, right?
No comments
Post a Comment