Muslim Rape, Feminist  Silence

By Jamie Glazov
FrontPage Magazine
November 1,  2006




Unveiled women who get raped deserve it.

That's  the pedagogy preached by the Mufti of Australia, Sheikh Taj al-Din 
al-Hilali,  who recently sparked an international stir by pronouncing that 
women 
who do not  veil themselves, and allow themselves to be "uncovered meat", are 
at fault if  they are raped.

This is nothing new, of course, and it is somewhat  mysterious why the 
Sheikh's comments have caused any shock at all, since his  view is legitimized 
by 
various Islamic texts and numerous social and legal  Islamic structures. And 
that is why back in September 2004 in Denmark,  al-Hilali's Australian 
counterpart, the Mufti Shahid Mehdi, declared exactly the  same thing, stating 
that 
unveiled women are "asking for rape."

All of  this, in turn, explains the skyrocketing epidemic of Muslim rape in 
non-Islamic  countries. Muslim newcomers are significantly overrepresented 
among convicted  rapists and rape suspects throughout European nations such as 
Sweden, Norway,  and Denmark.

No wonder why many Muslim rapists openly admit their actions  and justify 
them smugly with casual references to their religious and cultural  beliefs. 
This 
horrifying phenomenon was on display in a court trial in Australia  last 
year, in which a Muslim rapist, going by the name "MSK", taunted his  sobbing 
14-year-old victim and proudly professed the legitimacy of his sexual  assaults 
on 
young girls by explaining that his victims were not veiled -- as the  Islamic 
religion mandates women to be. [1]

"MSK" is from Pakistan. He is  doing in Australia what he learned best back 
home: in some of the most notorious  rural areas of Pakistan, gang rape is 
officially sanctioned as a legitimate form  of keeping women marginalized and 
"in 
their place." As noted earlier, certain  realms of Islam help institutionalize 
this form of violent misogyny. The Koran,  for instance,  permits Muslim men 
to enslave - and have sexual relations  with - the women of unbelievers 
captured in the spoils of war (Sura 4:23-24).  The Islamic legal manual 'Umdat 
al-Salik, which is endorsed by Al-Azhar  University, the most respected 
authority 
in Sunni Islam, sanctions this  violence, affirming that Muslims can enslave 
captured infidel women and make  them concubines.

To compound this pathology, a notion has developed  within the system of 
gender apartheid in which Muslims like "MSK" have grown up:  the idea that a 
woman 
who does not veil herself is somehow responsible for any  sexual or physical 
harm done to her. In the psychopathic mental gymnastics that  occur in the 
perpetrators' minds, the unveiled woman must be sexually punished  for 
violating 
the "modesty" code. Thus, when Islamic Muftis like Sheikh Taj  al-Din 
al-Hilali and Shahid Mehdi declare that women who refuse to wear  headscarves 
are 
"asking for rape," they are merely regurgitating a popular theme  in many 
segments 
of Islamic culture.



In traditional Islamic law,  rape cannot be proven unless four males testify 
as witnesses (Sura 24:4 and  24:13). In other words, raped women cannot get 
justice anywhere Islamic law  prevails. More horrifying still, a woman who has 
the courage to say she was  raped, and fails to produce the four male witnesses 
(which is obviously almost  always the case), ends up being punished because 
her accusation is regarded as  an admission of pre-marital sex or adultery. 
And this is why seventy-five  percent of the women in prison in Pakistan are 
behind bars for the crime of  being a victim of rape.



In Holland, myriad women now bear the  horrible scar that has infamously 
become known as "smiley," whereby one side of  the face is cut up from mouth to 
ear - a war mark left by Muslim rapists as a  warning to other women who don't 
veil themselves.



In France, the  phenomenon of Muslim gang rape as punishment for non-veiling 
even has a word to  describe it: "tournante" (take your turn). In areas where 
Muslims form the  majority (i.e. the Muslim suburb of Courneuve, France), even 
non-Muslim women  feel pressured to veil themselves in fear of Muslim sexual 
and physical  punishment.

In the context of this epidemic of Muslim violence against  women, and the 
open legitimization of it pronounced by Islamic clerics, one  would think that 
the Western feminists of our time would be up in arms,  sympathetically coming 
to the side of their raped sisters and standing up for  women's rights in 
general.



But this is just not the  case.

The West's leftist feminists are responding with an apathetic  heartlessness 
and deafening silence. [2]

It's all very much  understandable and expected, of course: it is politically 
correct and  cutting-edge to scream with moral indignation about a woman's 
right to an  abortion in the West, but to actually care for - and come to the 
public defense  of - the female victim of a gang-rape committed by Muslims is 
unthinkable. This  is so because admitting the Muslim rape epidemic, and the 
theology and  institutions on which it is based, and denouncing it, would 
violate 
the central  code of the "progressive" leftist faith: anti-Americanism and 
cultural  relativism. No culture can be said to be better than any other - 
unless it is  American culture, which is always fair game for derision and 
ridicule. But to  criticize any Third World culture in general - and an 
adversary 
culture in  particular - is to surrender the political cause and faith.



And  that's why leftist feminists are also completely mum on the horrors of 
forced  marriages, honor killings and female genital mutilation within the 
Islamic  world.



The worldview of Oslo Professor of Anthropology, Dr. Unni  Wikan, is perfect 
in representing leftist feminists' stand on Muslim rape and  Islamic gender 
apartheid. Wikan's solution for the high incidence of Muslims  raping Norwegian 
women stresses neither the punishment of the perpetrators nor  the repudiation 
of the Islamic theology that legitimizes such abuse of women.  Instead, Wikan 
recommends that Norwegian women veil themselves. This is because,  in Wikan's 
view, Western women must take their share of responsibility for the  rapes, 
since they are not dressing and behaving according to Muslim  understanding. 
The Norwegian women, in her view, are to realize that they live  in a 
multicultural society and should, therefore, adapt themselves to it.  Sheikhs 
Taj al-Din 
al-Hilali and Shahid Mehdi would be proud.


It has  long been evident that Western leftist feminists couldn't care less 
about real  actual breathing women; they care only about their ideological 
beliefs. For  them, the victims of Muslim rape can be easily forgotten and 
dismissed -- for  the pursuit of their ultimate goal: to aid and abet the 
West's 
totalitarian  enemies and to wreak the destruction of their own free societies 
which bestow  the individual liberties and rights that they despise and  abhor.



NOTES:



[1] Although debate exists about  whether Islam enforces women's veiling, and 
there are some valiant Islamic  reformers fighting for a tolerant Islam that 
does not enforce veiling, the  unfortunate reality is that Muslim 
fundamentalists find legitimacy for forced  veiling in Islamic texts. See 
Robert Spencer's 
Onward Muslim Soldiers, pp. 77-78  and his new book The Truth About Mohammad, 
pp. 44 and 61.



[2] Dr.  Phyllis Chesler has powerfully documented Western feminism's 
betrayal of Islamic  gender apartheid's victims in The Death of  Feminism.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to