Loading ...
Double-standards of Aussie politicians and media-pundits on misogyny
Excellent post by Irfan Yusuf on the hypocritical double-standards of politicians and shock-jocks (and frankly, ordinary journos). Yusuf convincingly argues that pollies only prance around condemning misogynistic attitudes about violence towards victims of sexual assault/abuse when those attitudes come from the ‘wrong’ religion. His proof:
* when Hilali (a Muslim religious leader) compared women to uncovered cat-meat alluding to their eligibility for rape, said pollies and media pundits loudly condemned him (rightly so) and called for Australian Muslims to be held accountable for those comments.
* when Fisher (a Catholic religious leader) described the parents of two girls raped by a Catholic priest as crankily dwelling on old wounds…. silence and tumbleweeds from those same pollies and media pundits.
Tags: Jihad Against the Munkar
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 26th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Salam,
I read the hue and cry over the comments made by a ‘mufti’. This is understandable that non muslims will condemn these comments, but why u?
In my humble opinion, if women go outside scantily dressed, what do they expect? Respect?
do they not want to be noticed in
those outfits? Even good people have their moralities screwed occasionlly. Yes the rapists are to blame, no doubt about that, but
dont u think, wearing wrong outfits in these times and in crime infested places worsen the situation against their favour? Yes,I concede that the remarks are cold and insensitive by that mufti, but dont u think they are just hard cold facts?
July 26th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Wow. If men or women wear tight-fitting or other clothes to make themselves look attractive they may want to be noticed, or perhaps they just want to feel good about themselves. It’s hardly likely that they would want to be violently assaulted. Astaghfirullah. And everybody should receive respect - surely that doesn’t depend upon the clothes one wears, one’s haircut etc.
July 26th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
wasalam,
Ordinary Pakistani, rape has very little to do with sexual attractiveness and having one’s head uncovered.
Rape is about violence and hatred of women, not sex.
For example, among the victims of rape are women who wear hijab, as well as prostitutes. In particular, rape of Muslim women as a war crime is well known. How did wearing hijab help them?
To say that a woman makes herself eligible for rape because her head is uncovered is preposterous and un-Islamic. Anyone who commits rape (or assault, or murder) is committing a crime of violence against another person. There is no excuse for it.
July 26th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Actually it has just struck me that you may be unfamiliar with the context of Hilali’s comments, Ordinary Pakistani.
In that sermon, Hilali alluded to the serious of crimes known colloquially as the “Lebanese gang rapes“. In particular, a group of young Australian men of Lebanese-Muslim background solicited a number of young non-Lebanese women (offering them drugs and transport) in order to rape them. When these rapists were caught, extremely harsh penalties were given to them. Hilali said:
Hilali made extremely offensive comments, because the gang-rapists were committing acts of horrible violence against the women, and to try and laugh it off as boys falling into temptation by adulterous women is just inexcusable.
July 27th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Thank u for clearifying the comments made by hilali.
but the qestion still remains, as I said earlier that there is no doubt about the guiltiness of the rapist, and I am not asking about the women who just not covering their heads, I was asking about THE ’scantily’ clad women.What do u think?
July 27th, 2008 at 2:24 am
Salaam alaikum, Ordinary Pakistani,
I think there are a couple of different issues here. First, Umm Yasmin and the commenters above all acknowledge that rape is a crime of violence and power over the powerless. The victims of rape are all ages and both sexes– women in their 80s and 90s, male and female children, I personally know a young man raped when he was a teenager and a man raped at knife-point when he was in his 20s. There’s a misperception that rape is a crime of “Oh, she was just so sexy, I couldn’t help myself and since she was wearing a miniskirt, she was practically inviting me.” It seems to me that Hilali’s comments reflect that kind of thinking.
I think you acknowledged Umm Yasmin’s statement that rape is a crime of violence and abuse of power, and I think what you’re asking is more, “But don’t you agree that it’s unwise and unsafe for a woman to go out scantily clad?” Honestly, I somewhat agree, but I do so hesitantly because there has historically been such a bias against rape victims. It can’t be said loudly or often enough that a person taken against their will is never at fault, no matter what they were wearing or where they were walking. Yeah, I do think that there are some choices a woman can make that are more likely to trigger a would-be rapist to excuse his violence to himself. A woman dressing in a way that promotes her sexuality does, I’m sure, make some rapists think that their crime isn’t so bad. But since rape is about exercising control over others, I wouldn’t be surprised if some rapists find the idea of violating a hijabi even more titillating. I understand that there’s a whole disgusting fetish for hijabis and niqabis. (I’m not equating have a fetish to being a rapist, I’m just saying.)
Anyway, yuck.
July 27th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
I think Anon has put it much better than I could.
I think this was pretty much the situation in the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) milieu as well. In that time, slave women walked around bare-breasted (in fact there was an early scholarly discussion over whether slave women were *allowed* to cover their heads or should they just cover their breasts in the context of what they were required to cover in salat).
When free women were being hassled by some of the mushrikeen and they complained to the Prophet, peace be upon him, the aya was revealed that they should draw their jilbabs around them, not to excuse those who were hassling them from their rudeness but so that they might be known to be Muslim. It was a prudent response to a jahili situation where respect for women and their autonomy and bodies was very low.
The problem I have with Hilali’s sermon, is that it attempts to put the onus and the blame on women. But the Qur’an ordered men to lower their gaze as much as it ordered women to cover themselves. That means there is a dual responsibility. If men in the Prophet’s time were being asked to lower their gaze whilst there women (slaves) walking around bare-breasted, then the men in today’s societies have simply no excuse no matter if a girl is wearing a miniskirt or a tank top. They cannot blame others for their own lack of self-control and adab.
The pragmatic response for women is that unfortunately we live in a society where there are men who will not lower their gaze. Hence, it is prudent to dress modestly. But the underlying message is that men and women should treat each other respect and a man or woman with good adab and taqwa, will treat another person with respect regardless of the other’s clothing.
But this is very different than saying the objectification of women’s bodies, and their free and easy use by men of low morals is the same as rape by criminals. That criminals try and excuse their crimes of violence and abuse by appealing to the argument ’she made me do it’ is part and parcel of their abuse of the victim!
The Prophet, peace be upon him, and the Qur’an made slander of an innocent woman an extremely serious crime. For a rapist to try and put some of the blame on their victim should not be tolerated in any legal system (Islamic or otherwise).
Okay I’ll get off my soapbox now