When I’m elected president some day, I hope the headlines proclaim, “Rogers wears pink bra (and is elected president or something).” After all, a woman’s appearance deserves mention before her accomplishments. At least, this is what I got out of the first sentence of a recent Chicago Tribune article about the Miss Universe pageant, which reads, “Miss Indonesia has glossy black hair and a law degree.”

The rest of the article proves to be just as ripe with gender implications as the first sentence. The Tribune explains that though Artika Sari Devi, Miss Indonesia, hopes to participate in the Miss Universe competition in Thailand on May 30, Indonesian Islamic clerics feel that Artika shouldn’t participate in an event that, unlike the Miss Indonesia pageant, includes a swimsuit competition. Among those protesting Indonesia’s participation in the world pageant is the Indonesian Mujahedeen Council, with leader Fauzan Al-Anshary quoted as saying, “There’s nothing wrong with her wearing a swimsuit in her room… But if it’s in public, that will give rise to bad things and crimes.”

Let’s say for a moment that Miss Indonesia or some other Islamic Miss Universe hopeful subscribes to Mr. Al-Anshary’s impeccable logic, or more likely, feels that the swimsuit competition does in fact violate her Muslim beliefs about modesty. It seems to me that the Miss Universe competition should remain willing to accommodate these women. Perhaps in the event that a competitor’s religious beliefs prohibit skimpy attire, she should retain the right to, say, wear something else during the swimsuit competition or appear twice in another modeling event.

Artika, however, “sees no conflict between Islam and a bathing suit.” She mentions that her family doesn’t object to her participation in the Miss Universe pageant and also points out that other countries where Muslim ideology dominates, such as Egypt, send contestants to the pageant without problems. If Artika wants to compete in the swimsuit competition, I say it’s her prerogative. The Islamic leaders of Indonesia have no right to limit Artika’s presentation of her body.

The article also states, “For Artika, her family, and the women who have pushed for years to send an official Indonesian contestant to Miss Universe, this issue represents women’s empowerment.” It’s true that Artika invokes the feminist belief that her body is her own – it does not belong to Islamic clerics, nor to Indonesia and as such, what Artika wears reflects her own personality rather than the moral character of her country or religion. However, parading around in a swimsuit while people rate your beauty does not represent empowerment. This is a lesson many young women – especially the girls who go out to bars in skirts so short I’m not sure why they bother and claim women’s lib as defense – need to learn.

The feminist movement revolves around the idea that women deserve as much as men regarding the management of companies, families, the country, etc. When society judges women based on appearance, when women strive to meet standards for beauty and sexiness, they spend their time, energy and money working on their hair, make-up and figures rather than, say, running for Congress. So it’s not that a feminist can’t or shouldn’t paint her nails and participate in swimsuit competitions – it’s just that a feminist values and utilizes the power for change that comes with her law degree more often than she worries about how she looks in a swimsuit.

The Miss Universe controversy provides yet another example of the world’s struggles with respecting and accommodating various religious beliefs while simultaneously refraining from forcing religious guidelines on those who do not subscribe to them. Furthermore, it suggests that we have yet to fully comprehend and employ the true definition and implications of women’s empowerment.

But I can’t worry about that right now. I’m busy trying on swimsuits. Forget president – I’d rather be Miss Universe. Or at least Miss Daily Illini.