BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Switchboard >

Thinly veiled

  
  

Page: 1234(5)

 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:34 / 27.10.06
I thought, and am pretty sure, this would have been, or is, a common teaching amongst Imams, that being, women not covered invite rape from men.

We actually discussed this a fair bit upthread, SR - I'd start by asking what you mean by common and how sure you are that it is the case. Is it, for example, as common as the belief among Christian priests that Jesus died and rose from the dead?

Which comes up against the question of doctrine and the question of personal prejudice - religion and culture. Wearing the veil, as far as I can see, is a cultural action, many of the practitioners of which are Muslim. The idea that provoicatively dressed women are inviting rape is, I think, also a cultural action, the culture in question being the culture of misogynist scum, which, as you say, also welcomes non-muslims - we have had similar situations in the UK, most famously when a judge described a molested child as "no angel". Is it also a religious action? I would probably say not. Andrew Robb, quoted in the article you cited, seems to agree:

"I must say I'm shocked - I'm quite angry about this and frustrated by this decision of a few leaders in Sydney to wipe their hands of this matter - I think it's unacceptable," he said.

"And I do suspect it in no way reflects the widespread disgust that I observed across the Muslim community around Australia yesterday."


Now, Sheik al-Hilaly is saying that he is talking not about sexual assault in that sermon but about sexual licentiousness - about adultery. I very much suspect that to be bullshit, from what I've read of the speech, although context translation fishcakes. However, he also apparently added:

Sheik Hilali said there were women who "sway suggestively" and wore make up and immodest dress ... "and then you get a judge without mercy [rahma] and he gives you 65 years... but the problem all began with who?"

(From the UK Guardian)

which seems to suggest that he's not talking about adultery, unless Australians take it a lot more seriously than Brits.

From the same article:

But Muslim community leaders rounded on Sheik Hilali for his comments, insisting that he no longer deserved his title as Australia's mufti.

If this is the case, it suggests that this opinion is not one that is commonly expressed, or at the very least one that other Muslim community leaders would not want to be seen as representative or as one that is commonly expressed.

Hoom.
 
 
Disco is My Class War
12:57 / 27.10.06
Suitcase Rider, if you've been watching the Australian TV news yesterday and today, you'll realise that it's completely untrue to claim that 'most' imams would support Hilali. Although I don't like to talk about the 'Muslim community', because of the enormous diversity of political and cultural perspectives within Islam in Australia, an overwhelming number of people representing themselves as Islamic community leaders have distanced themselves from Sheik Hilali's comments. The people who run Lakemba Mosque, where he lectures, have sent him on a 'self enforced holiday' and there's talk of making him step down. Now, Hilali has made similarly crack-potted and idiotic statements before -- the 1980's claim that Jewish people manipulate Muslims first by sex, then by sexual perversion, then by economics, springs to mind (issues much?). But he hasn't ever been close to losing his job, probably for reasons to do with factionalism, or whatever.

Hilali is also represented by the media as "THE most powerful Muslim cleric in Australia" precisely because he has a habit of making inflammatory, anti-Western statements. He gets lots of publicity, which he seems to enjoy; the media and politicians use him to decry the spread of "Islamist fundamentalism" in the diaspora. Hilali is very popular, it's true, but I sincerely doubt he has half as much political power as various politicians and media claim. Not half as much power as, for example, the Catholic Cardinal George Pell -- who, I suspect, has similar views on women and sex, and also has at least two cabinet ministers tucked in his pocket.
 
 
Slate
05:20 / 30.10.06
I'd start by asking what you mean by common and how sure you are that it is the case.

Spending 8 months in Turkey and chatting at lengths about Islam at the bar many times(a three week period) over many drinks with an ex-Imam I *think* it is a commonly held view the world over(that by not wearing the covering the women is inviting rape). But that is only my view on what the media would term the "hardline" Clerics, would hold as true and upholding. There are a few more tenants which prompted me to go buy a translated version of the Koran. I got about 50 pages in and put it down, I could not read on due to frustration and I guess fear.

I did spend a bit of time looking at the media this weekend and was pleased that this view regarding women as pieces of uncovered meat does not really reflect the Australian Muslim community either after much protest by the Muslim community here and political heavyweights about what Hilali has said. His comments have really upset ALOT of people here in Australia with almost all newspapers dedicating several inches and punditry comments alike.

Just for clarification, a Mufti is the highest position in the Muslim faith a person can go within that country so the media is quite right when they say "The most powerful Muslim Cleric" etc etc. Which I guess is another reason why I believe the previously stated view regarding women as meat inviting rape is common within countries that practice Sharia Law and others, like Malaysia for example. I work with a Malay Muslim and he says laws in his country are very reflective of the Koran, eg. A woman was arrested by a Mullah after she called a male electrician to fix a broken circuit, the problem was she was alone in her house with another man.

This takes us wandering from this threads main focus, and that is Jack Straws comments made in Britain about a British Muslim's woman's veil. There are correlations, however thin, which is why I went ahead with this post.
 
 
Tom Coates
06:43 / 30.10.06
I'd be fascinated to know some statistics about relative levels of rape in various western and fundamentalist Islamic theocracies, although unfortunately I suspect that differences in reporting levels would make them untrustworthy.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:10 / 30.10.06
I work with a Malay Muslim and he says laws in his country are very reflective of the Koran, eg. A woman was arrested by a Mullah after she called a male electrician to fix a broken circuit, the problem was she was alone in her house with another man.

Could you tell me where in the |Koran it says that women without veils are like plates of uncovered meat? Presumably somewhere in the first 50 pages?
 
 
Olulabelle
07:27 / 30.10.06
I'm not sure I understand your question Haus, since I can't see how the bit you've quoted and the question you have asked relate.

Suitcase Rider's reference to uncovered meat comes from ABC News Online quoted here: Community and political leaders are distancing themselves from senior Muslim cleric Sheikh Taj el-Din Al Hilaly's comparison of women who do not cover their bodies to raw meat.

Sheikh Al Hilaly is reported as saying that women who do not wear the hijab, or headdress, are like uncovered meat.

The section of Suitcase Rider's words you have selected to quote is about women being arrested for being alone with men. Is your question about the fact that the Koran does not permit women to be alone with men? Or is it about the amount of the Koran a person should have read before ze is qualified to comment? I personally think 50 pages is quite a lot and it's certainly more than most people who are not Muslim have read. Or is your question about whether Sheik Hilaly should have referred to uncovered women as 'pieces of meat' as he purportedly did?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:41 / 30.10.06
Forgive me. I should have quoted the preceding sentence. Thus:

Which I guess is another reason why I believe the previously stated view regarding women as meat inviting rape is common within countries that practice Sharia Law and others, like Malaysia for example. I work with a Malay Muslim and he says laws in his country are very reflective of the Koran, eg. A woman was arrested by a Mullah after she called a male electrician to fix a broken circuit, the problem was she was alone in her house with another man.

The argumentation is: Here is another reason why I believe that the view that uncovered women invite rape is common in countires that practise Sharia law. I know a Malaysian Muslim, who says that laws in his country reflect the Koran.

Therefore, for this statement to make any sense whatsoever, Sharia law has to reflect the idea that an unveiled woman is like uncovered meat and, since Sharia law reflects the Koran, according to SR's source, the Koran must also state that an unveiled woman is like uncovered meat. Since Suitcase Rider read only the first 50 pages of the Koran before Simmonsing the joint, it stands to reason that the statement that unveiled women are like uncovered meat must be somewhere in the first 50 pages of the Koran.
 
 
Disco is My Class War
09:14 / 30.10.06
Suitcase Rider, you're not really addressing my points either, which I'll just repeat for you: so an elderly male religious cleric makes an objectionable comment about women who don't cover up asking for it. How many elderly Christian clerics have made similar comments, in history? Gee, quite a few, it seems:

On one of the largest Catholic listservs--I won't say which one--I encountered a published Catholic author--I won't say which one--who said that his Eucharist was "ruined" because of women who dressed skimpy and provoked sinful lust in him. He prayed for the souls of these women, who he believed God would punish severely for forcing men to lust after them during the Eucharist.

I pointed out that when Jesus brought up lust, it was men who were in danger of adultery for lusting after beautiful women, not the women they were lusting after.

He responded that I did not understand Catholic moral theology. And suddenly, lasting for a period of several days, every woman on the listserv--which, up to that point, was about two-thirds female--went completely silent.

I later realized that he was basically right, when it comes to the views of the current Vatican incumbents, and that was the moment I realized I'd never make it as a Catholic.

So, why is it that when the Mufti says so, everyone makes a big fuss? I'm not claiming his comments weren't crap, I'm just saying that it's totally hypocritical to say this is a specifically Islamic problem.
 
 
Slate
05:25 / 31.10.06
I should have been more clear, my apologies. Malaysia does not practice Sharia Law at all. On reading my post it would seem I stated the assumption that Sharia Law was in effect in Malaysia, but it is not. I was stating that laws in Malaysia reflect some values of the Koran, and alluding to the point that there are very strict & complex codes of conduct within Malay society when it comes to sexual identity, which was the point of mentioning the Malay women who was arrested. A mistake on my part admittedly, in some vague way I thought this may serve to further explain my assumptions, which on deeper reflection are way off the mark.

I guess mentioning the Koran is pointless, unless you are fluent in Arabic you do not know or understand the Koran, thus have no understanding of Islam, which is me, and I would guess 99% of Barbelith?

Tom, with regards to statistics, and again within Sharia Law, Pakistan has a law called the Hudood Ordinance which you could do some checking up on for numbers? You could not extrapolate these figures out for the rest of the world though, just Pakistan.

So, why is it that when the Mufti says so, everyone makes a big fuss? I'm not claiming his comments weren't crap, I'm just saying that it's totally hypocritical to say this is a specifically Islamic problem.

There is a back story to all of this. In my perusal of the media there was a reference to the Sydney Gang rapes within Hilali's speech, and this would have had a lot to do with the big fuss, but you are correct. It is slightly hypocritical yes, I agree, and I am not saying Christianity or Judaism or Hindi etc. etc. is correct or any better for that matter either. I personally dislike all religions equally, but I do try to understand them.

Hilali has always stated that the media has slandered and misrepresented him. This might just be true and I would like further clarification to solidify or correct my assumptions, whether they come from Hilali or elsewhere.

I think interpretation is the key here. The Australian public did react with disdain to what Hilali said, and it's my assumption only that this view is widely held outside of Australia within the greater Muslim community. I didn't read this in the Koran as you have concluded Haus. It has formed through my experiences traveling for the last 2 years. From my reading, there is not one verse in the Koran that states women must wear the Burka, it just states dress modestly, so the question about the veil comes from the mind of man, not Allah so we have interpretation issues arising. Actually the one thing I did read within the first 50 pages of the Koran was that Islam will not tolerate any other religion on earth.

I know my posts may be perceived to contain some negativity towards Islam, but it's not my aim to denigrate Islam in any way shape or form. I want further understanding of this, and when it comes to questions regarding cultural differences especially revolving around religion, things can and often do get interpreted the wrong way. Also I did want to show the slight contrast between Australia and Britain when it comes to integration of a minority with vastly different backgrounds & I think Britain allows more cultural integration than Australia. I see the main crux of his thread being: Can a religion such as Islam, be interpreted the same way in different cultures with different values and still be called Islam by the broader Islamic community? I think right now this very issue is being thrashed out in Mosques across the globe. When this is defined, questions regarding details will be a lot easier to answer. I only say this because my experiences with Islam are a little fragmented. Indian Islam is different to Turkish Islam which is different to Australian Islam.

In Arabic I am called a Lieek. It means godless.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
17:33 / 31.10.06
Veil teacher was obeying a fatwa. Short story: She got the job (without wearing a niqab), consulted a mufti who told her she had to wear it in the presence of non-related males, the rest we know. It explains why, as was disclosed in the Telegraph last week, she wasn't wearing the veil when she was interviewed for the job.

However, a non-Murdoch paper might report this story without trying to make it seem some sort of big Islamic conspiracy. A highly religious Christian might seek guidance through prayer or see a priest before taking on a new job. I doubt that would be seen as newsworthy if they then got in to a similar situation, though I suppose there was the thing that Ruth Kelly's membership of Opus Dei was seen as more troubling than her membership of Tony Blair's cabinet.
 
 
Ticker
19:08 / 01.11.06
A bit off topic but...after following SR link to the wiki I followed another to this article on the Rape and Hudood Ordinance: Perversions of Justice in the Name of Islam

It brings documented information about how human beings are being treated from an invested Islamic source. This voice, one that supports Islam and women, is almost entirely lacking in the way Islam is presented by the media in the States.

It was a hell of thing to read.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
15:17 / 24.11.06
Support teacher has now been sacked.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
05:49 / 09.03.07
Support teacher's appeal starts.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
06:47 / 20.03.07
Minister gives schools right to ban Muslim veil.

He will tell headteachers that they will have the right to stop pupils covering their faces under a new uniform policy to be distributed to schools. The policy will be put out to consultation. In practice, few children wear the full veil and the guidance does not appear to stop girls wearing a head scarf.
 
  

Page: 1234(5)

 
  
Add Your Reply