Maybe Islam can be laughed into obscurity. Although its ideology is dangerous it has more comic opera opportunities than even Hitler's Germany. Islamic commentary is so irrational and juvenile that close examination would make it a laughingstock for the world.
It is also so non-PC that its leftist-supporters are shown to be true hypocrites. -Bruce Religious extremists an insult to our values April 14, 2005 Some disturbing views on women run counter to multiculturalism, writes Pamela Bone. 'Every minute in the world a woman is raped, and she has no one to blame but herself, for she has displayed her beauty to the whole world," Sheikh Feiz Muhammad told a packed public meeting in the Bankstown Town Hall last month. "Strapless, backless, sleeveless - they are nothing but satanical. Mini-skirts, tight jeans - all this to tease men and to appeal to (their) carnal nature." There was pressure on Muslim women to unveil, the sheikh said, and this was because "they want you to be available for their gross, disgusting, filthy abomination! They want you to be a sex symbol!" The woman who wore the hijab was hiding her beauty from the eyes of "lustful, hungry wolves", he said. Sheikh Feiz Muhammad teaches at the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool, NSW. His long, ranting speech, damning and ridiculing Western culture (if you allow your wife to watch the "devil" of daytime television, he advised men, you will come home from work and find she is being "negative" towards you) was greeted with frequent applause. AdvertisementAdvertisement Somewhat more moderately, Dr Amirudin Ahamed wrote in last week's Sunday Age (10/4) that a woman who wears a short skirt and gets drunk "would definitely be at higher risk of sexual violation than, say, a sober Muslim woman at home". What should be the response to such comments? Ignore them, remembering that in times past Italian and Greek migrants wanted to lock up their daughters too? Reflect that as the majority, non-Muslims ought to be robust enough to take criticisms of their culture in our stride? Remember too that good old Aussie-born men can hold not dissimilar views about women (a state government effort to change the culture of male team sports cited a survey that found nearly 10 per cent of young men thought it was OK to force a woman to have sex if she was wearing revealing clothing). And that feminists have traditionally railed against women as sex objects. We are a multicultural society, and most people like it that way and want it to continue to work. There are, however, some "issues" here. Leave aside the use of a public venue to make a speech clearly derogatory towards the wider culture: at its worst the sheikh's speech can be seen as at least a justification for rape. A non-Muslim religious leader making public comments far milder than the above would be forced to resign. If a Muslim leader's words are to be simply overlooked (perhaps nothing better can be expected?) is this itself not a kind of racism? My first conclusion is that multiculturalism is valuable and worth protecting. We are, irrevocably, a multicultural society, and most people like it that way and want it to continue to work. There is also, despite some disgraceful attacks on mosques and on individuals, a lot of goodwill towards Muslims. There are many Muslim leaders who are preaching moderation, and who would likely be embarrassed by the sheikh's speech. We want a society in which people of all religions and cultures can get on together. But there also have to be some core values, and - notwithstanding the views of a minority of unreconstructed football players - one of those values is the equality of women. The second is that laws against religious vilification are a mistake. Yes, laws against racial hatred, because no one has any choice about their race. But unless we are to accept that human beings are incapable of overcoming their social conditioning, we do have a choice about what we believe. Beliefs are about ideas, and ideas must be open to debate, to criticism and even ridicule. We are entitled to find some beliefs of any religion absurd and to say that we do. The third conclusion is that Feiz Muhammad and Ahamed are simply wrong. There is no evidence that women in societies where they are forced to cover are less subject to violence, sexual or otherwise. There may be less reporting of rape (when the word of four honest Muslim men is required to prove the rape and if it is not proved the woman is then liable to be punished for adultery, it is rather less likely to be reported); but there is overwhelming evidence across the Muslim world of violence against women, in the form of honour killings, stonings, or beatings for minor infringements of religious codes. The home, where Ahamed claims Muslim women are safe, is exactly where women in any society are most likely to be assaulted. But a British study of family violence (reported by Geraldine Brooks in her book about Islamic women, Nine Parts of Desire) found that women married to men of Muslim background were eight times more likely to be killed by their husbands than any other women in Britain. What is really angering the fundamentalists is that Muslim women not only in the West but across the Muslim world are coming out, challenging male interpretations of their religion, demanding an end to their oppression. Yes, these women are still a minority, and they have a far harder struggle ahead of them than Western feminists ever did; but they are making gains (Morocco has brought in family law reforms; in Saudi Arabia it has just been announced that women may apply for driving licences). The argument of some moderate Muslims and well-meaning cultural relativists is that non-Muslim feminists have no business criticising the treatment of Muslim women, and that any change must come from within. As Emma Bonino, a member of the European Parliament, said recently: "I remember how important it was for those of us fighting for basic rights and equality in Italy to receive support from women in other European countries who were further ahead in the same fight." Pamela Bone is an associate editor. http://www.theage.com.au/news/Pamela-Bone/Religious-extremists-an-insult-to- our-values/2005/04/13/1113251680541.html?oneclick=true ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> DonorsChoose. A simple way to provide underprivileged children resources often lacking in public schools. Fund a student project in NYC/NC today! http://us.click.yahoo.com/EHLuJD/.WnJAA/cUmLAA/TySplB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> 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/
