Corruption scandals erode public trust, political controversies threaten social stability, and economic uncertainty weighs heavily on the future of our youth. Yet, amid these pressing concerns, our national mind seems preoccupied with sex. We fear moral threats from short skirts and men and women in the same place, even in hospitals and spaces devoted to learning, creativity, and the pursuit of knowledge.
This obsession is nowhere clearer than in Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia’s (UTM) cultural and arts regulations, which prohibit
mixed-gender performances, prescribe attire, and even dictate musical rhythms.
These rules are not cultural policies. They reveal a troubling fixation on
regulating gender interaction while ignoring the real crises in education.
Universities have not failed because male and female students are allowed to
live, study and work together. Nor have universities contributed to moral
decline for those same reasons. The evidence is there for all to see – the moral
decline is in the practices of those chosen or appointed to lead.
Universities Are Not Custodians of Sexual Morality
The university’s intrinsic role is inquiry, not ideology. It
is a crucible of learning, designed to challenge orthodoxy, foster dialogue,
and prepare students for a pluralistic world. To dictate what constitutes
“acceptable” art or culture based on gender segregation or religious dogma is
to abandon this purpose.
Arts and culture are expressions of identity, dissent, and
imagination. They are not administrative categories to be policed. When UTM regulates
cultural content on the basis of sex, it reduces education to moral policing.
By its own logic, such restrictions would justify the closure of universities
altogether, since, by definition, universities are open spaces for the mingling
of people and ideas.
UTM’s Regulations Violate Constitutional Rights
UTM’s regulations also betray a fundamental misunderstanding
of constitutional law. Students do not surrender their rights upon enrolment.
The Federal Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, association, and
movement. These rights are not suspended at the campus gate. In fact, the
genesis of the modern university stems from these rights.
To prohibit mixed-gender performances or confine women’s
performances to female audiences is not discipline—it is discrimination. To
restrict attire and musical rhythms is not governance—it is censorship. These
actions are disproportionate to any legitimate interest the university may have
in maintaining order. They reflect a dangerous conflation of moral policing
with educational authority.
UTM Is a Creature of Law, Not of Whim
UTM exists by virtue of statutory enactment and is sustained
by taxpayer funds. It is not a private seminary. It does not have the liberty
to redefine its role based on passing whims and fancies. Its mandate is public,
secular, and educational. Any deviation from this mandate is a breach of public
trust.
If UTM insists on defining itself through gender segregation
and cultural control, it undermines its own legitimacy. A university that
cannot tolerate diversity cannot produce wisdom. A university that cannot
respect its students’ dignity has no business calling itself an institution of
higher learning.
The Social Role of Universities: Living Together, Not
Apart
The university plays an important social role. It does not
merely educate a social group—it provides the environment to live together
peacefully, to cultivate values, and to prepare for livelihoods that will guide
students through the rest of their lives.
The role of a university is not to regiment students into
untested ideological molds. It is to nurture empathy, cooperation, and critical
thinking. UTM’s cultural rules violate the very principles it is duty-bound to
protect: inclusivity, dignity, and intellectual freedom. Instead of obsessing
over gender segregation, the university should be probing deeper questions
about academic freedom, graduate employability, inclusivity and fostering
inclusive excellence?
The Modern University: A Product of Evolving Thought
The modern university evolved from centres of learning for
the few to the Humboldtian model of research and teaching, accessible to all.
It is shaped by global norms, human rights frameworks, and the imperative to
democratize knowledge. It is a living institution, responsive to society’s
needs and accountable to its values.
UTM’s regulations betray this legacy. They do not reflect
cultural stewardship but cultural control. And control, especially when rooted
in sexual segregation, is the antithesis of education.
Conclusion
At a time when corruption and political instability threaten
the nation, it is tragic that our universities are consumed with regulating sex
and the separation of genders. This fixation distracts from the real crises of
governance, economy, and justice.
UTM must urgently reconsider its cultural and arts
regulations. It must reaffirm its commitment to constitutional rights,
educational integrity, and social responsibility. The future of Malaysian
education depends on our ability to defend the university, not as a fortress of
sexual morality, but as a sanctuary of thought, pluralism, and human dignity.
