Sex Narrows the National Mind

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.