Outrage as Muslim cleric likens women to 'uncovered meat'

[Gan]

A Muslim cleric's claim that women who do not wear the veil are like 'uncovered meat' who attract sexual predators sparked outrage around Australia yesterday.

Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, the nation's most senior Muslim cleric, compared immodestly-dressed women who do not wear the Islamic headdress with meat that is left uncovered in the street and is then eaten by cats.

EU boss Barroso blasts veil as 'obstacle to communication' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=412741&in_page_id=1811)


Politicians including Prime Minister John Howard, community leaders and a large number of Muslims condemned the mufti's comments amid calls that he should be deported to Egypt, his country of origin.

He has since been forced to apologise for his remarks.

In a Ramadam sermon in a Sydney mosque, Sheik al-Hilali suggested that a group of Muslim men recently jailed for many years for gang rapes were not entirely to blame.

There were women, he said, who 'sway suggestively' and wore make-up and immodest dress "and then you get a judge without mercy and gives you 65 years. But the problem, but the problem all began with who?" he said, referring to the women victims.

Addressing 500 worshippers on the topic of adultery, Sheik al-Hilali added: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it..whose fault is it - the cats or the uncovered meat?

"The uncovered meat is the problem."

He went on: "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab (veil), no problem would have occurred."

Women, he said, were 'weapons' used by Satan to control men.

His comments, reported yesterday in the nationally-circulated newspaper The Australian, created a storm of outrage.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=412697&in_page_id=1770
____________________________________

:wtf:

[Sean of the Thread]

Praise Allah.

[xtc]

The man's comment are obviously wacky and out there.

It is interesting to note that a Catholic Nun who covers herself and wears the habit is devotional to God and to be respected. However when a Muslim woman does much the same, she is the object of oppression and scorn and her clothing separates her from society.

[Gan]

The man's comment are obviously wacky and out there.

It is interesting to note that a Catholic Nun who covers herself and wears the habit is devotional to God and to be respected. However when a Muslim woman does much the same, she is the object of oppression and scorn and her clothing separates her from society.

Because one is voluntary and one is not.

Edited for clarity:

Being a nun is voluntary.

Being a muslim woman in a muslim society is not voluntary. (It is voluntary in America though.)

[xtc]

Because one is voluntary and one is not.

Only relatively recently has the habit become voluntary for Catholic Nuns. It was mandatory for centuries.

In Britain the Nakib is voluntary. There is no law requiring a woman to wear one. If a Muslim woman choses to wear one she shouldn't be subject to ridicule or harrassement.

How about Orthodox Jewish Men? They are forced to wear specific clothing. Does this not separate them from the rest of British society?

[Latrinsorm]

1) It's worriesome that Shiek al-Hilali likened criminal humans to animals.
2) Not all Muslim women wearing the covering garments are forced to do so.

[Latrinsorm]

Addendum: Can someone do a good remake of the song "I Wish I Could Shimmy Like My Sister Kate" keeping in mind the.. alternate worldview suggested by the cleric in question?

[Parkbandit]

Only relatively recently has the habit become voluntary for Catholic Nuns. It was mandatory for centuries.


I really hope for your sake you are not comparing a nun to the entire female muslim population... because that would be really, really stupid.

[Goretawn]

First: are there any numbers that actually say a woman is less likely to be sexually assaulted if they are covered? I have not heard any.

Second: I am very suprised that no one else has noted that he blames the women for being raped and that the person that raped them is the victim. That there should have been mercy on the rapist because the woman was at fault.

[Warriorbird]

Sounds like a Republican.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Well, it's too bad that rape has absolutely nothing to do with wanting sex/lust, and a whole hell of a lot to do with power.

People rape for the control it gives them, not because they think "Wow that chick is hot.. I don't feel like giving her a pick-up line, so I'm gonna rape her instead!" Instead of overpowering someone and stabbing them with a knife.. to put it simply and crudely, they stab the victim with a penis. It's why not-so-attractive victims are raped. It's not like if your hot and in a mini-skirt your chances of being raped go up. It's more like if you're alone, in a secluded area, and give off the body language of someone who would submit (head down, shoulder's slump) your more likely to be attacked and raped.

In conclusion, this cleric is an asshat.

[Gan]

Only relatively recently has the habit become voluntary for Catholic Nuns. It was mandatory for centuries.

In Britain the Nakib is voluntary. There is no law requiring a woman to wear one. If a Muslim woman choses to wear one she shouldn't be subject to ridicule or harrassement.

How about Orthodox Jewish Men? They are forced to wear specific clothing. Does this not separate them from the rest of British society?

I edited my earlier post for clarity.

I meant to say being a nun is voluntary, thus wearing the habit is a voluntary exercise in light of that.

Being a muslim woman in a muslim society is not voluntary, thus wearing the veil is not a voluntary exercise in either light.

However, being a muslim woman in America is voluntary, and thus wearing the veil is voluntary in light of that.

So in summary. Being forced to do something against your will by your religion while living in a state that has the freedom to choose or not to choose your religion pretty much negates the idea of being oppressed, especially when all you have to do is walk away.

Unfortunately not all nation-states recognize freedom of religion.

[Sean]

I suppose you could just choose not to be Muslim... of course then you're just choosing to be raped... six of one half a dozen of the other.

[Latrinsorm]

Let's not make the mistake of using "Muslim society" to refer to repressive societies that happen to be Muslim. The important characteristic is being repressive, not being "Muslim".

[Gan]

Not to mention that your retirement party from a 'repressive' muslim sect is usually accompanied by a sword to the neck in some places?

[Artha]

Women, he said, were 'weapons' used by Satan to control men.

Huh.

I guess even a broken clock's right twice a day.

[xtc]

I really hope for your sake you are not comparing a nun to the entire female muslim population... because that would be really, really stupid.

Why would that be stupid? Both cover their head for religious reasons (some Nuns and some female Muslims)

For the record the entire female Muslim population doesn't wear the Nakib or even the Hijab.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Why would that be stupid? Both cover their head for religious reasons (some Nuns and some female Muslims)

For the record the entire female Muslim population doesn't wear the Nakib or even the Hijab.

Because many Muslim women have no choice in the manner of being Muslim-- according to their country's law, they must wear a headcovering.

No one has ever been forced to be a nun.

[Artha]

That's not true.

[xtc]

I edited my earlier post for clarity.

I meant to say being a nun is voluntary, thus wearing the habit is a voluntary exercise in light of that.

Being a muslim woman in a muslim society is not voluntary, thus wearing the veil is not a voluntary exercise in either light.

However, being a muslim woman in America is voluntary, and thus wearing the veil is voluntary in light of that.

So in summary. Being forced to do something against your will by your religion while living in a state that has the freedom to choose or not to choose your religion pretty much negates the idea of being oppressed, especially when all you have to do is walk away.

Unfortunately not all nation-states recognize freedom of religion.

Ther Nakib isn't manadatory in many Muslim countries or countries that are predominantly Muslim. It isn't mandatory in Iran, Pakistan or Bangladesh or Jordan or Syria or Malaysia or Indonesia, and it wasn't in Saddam's Iraq.

For the record many people born into Christian familes in America are forced to follow certain dictates and are brain washed. Members of all religions brain washes their offspring.

[Sean of the Thread]

She's dumb don't get worked up over it.

[xtc]

Because many Muslim women have no choice in the manner of being Muslim-- according to their country's law, they must wear a headcovering.

No one has ever been forced to be a nun.

Please see my post above.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

For the record many people born into Christian familes in America are forced to follow certain dictates and are brain washed. Members of all religions brain washes their offspring.

I can partially agree to this.

But to say that in all countries Muslim women can just remove their head coverings with absolutely no violent retribution is just not true.

To me there's enough of variance in culture/retribution to make the distinction between Nun's wearing headcoverings and Muslim women wearing headcoverings.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I'm dumb so I don't get worked up over it.

Fixed that for you.

[Sean of the Thread]

Point and case.

[xtc]

I can partially agree to this.

But to say that in all countries Muslim women can just remove their head coverings with absolutely no violent retribution is just not true.

To me there's enough of variance in culture/retribution to make the distinction between Nun's wearing headcoverings and Muslim women wearing headcoverings.

It is in a minority of Muslim countries that the Nakib is mandatory. As I previously pointed out it isn't mandatory in Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Palestine, Iraq, Indonesia, Malyasia.

I know it is difficult for western women to comprehend but most Muslim women wear the Naqib and the Hijab voluntarily.

[Gan]

Some interesting information from Wikipedia on the Hijab. I could not find an entry for the Nakib.




Detailed scholarly attention has been focused on prescribing female dress. Most scholars agree that the basic requirements are that when in the presence of someone of the opposite sex (other than a close family member - mahram (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahram)), a woman should cover her body, and walk and dress in a way which does not draw sexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex) attention to her. Some scholars go so far as to specify exactly which areas of the body must be covered. In many cases, this is everything save the face and hands but others require everything save the eyes to be covered.

The Saudi Arabian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) version of modest dress is composed of an abaya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abaya) or loose robe, ħijāb or headcovering and niqāb or face veil. The Saudi niqāb usually leaves a long open slot for the eyes; the slot is held together by a string or narrow strip of cloth. Abaya and ħijāb are required; the niqāb is optional.
While Pakistan has no laws enforcing ħijāb, there are many parts of the country where there is strong social pressure for women to observe ħijāb, or purdah, as it is called in Persian. Many Pakistani women who observe purdah wear a garment called the pak-chadar, a headscarf with attached veil. However, there are also many Pakistani women who simply wear a dupatta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dupatta) or chunari (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chunari&action=edit) to cover their heads. These are long scarves, often made of a light material, that match the woman's garments.
There are no laws enforcing ħijāb in India as it is a secular, Hindu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu)-majority country, but in some conservative, Muslim-majority areas, there is social pressure to cover. Some Indian muslim women wear the burqa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burqa), although many content themselves with dupatta or chunari.
A relatively less strict (though still considerably restrictive) interpretation is that of the current Iranian government, which requires women to wear loose-fitting coats or cloaks in public, as well as a head scarf that covers the hair.
The burqa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burqa) is the most extreme example of this belief: not even a woman's eyes are visible. Originating in Pakistan, it is more commonly associated with Afghanistan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan). Typically, a burqa is composed of many yards of light material pleated around a cap that fits over the top of the head. There is an embroidered openwork grille where the burqa passes over the eyes. Under the Taliban (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban), the burqa was obligatory. Under the current government, it may or may not be worn.
In Malaysia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia) the headscarf is known as a tudung
Tunisian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunisian) authorities say they are encouraging women, instead, to "wear modest dress in line with Tunisian traditions i.e. no headscarf.[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab#_note-7)In private, and in the presence of mahrams, the rules on dress are relaxed. However scholars disagree as to what is appropriate conduct for women when alone with their husbands. Some teachers say that modest behavior is preferable even in private[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab#_note-8) but others stress the importance of mutual freedom and pleasure of the husband and wife[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab#_note-9).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

It is in a minority of Muslim countries that the Nakib is mandatory. As I previously pointed out it isn't mandatory in Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Palestine, Iraq, Indonesia, Malyasia.

I know it is difficult for western women to comprehend but most Muslim women wear the Naqib and the Hijab voluntarily.


Please don't turn this into an issue of personal feminism, etc. I don't have ANY problems with headcoverings, at all, when worn voluntarily or required after a knowledgable decision has been made in regards to joining a religious group/order.

I think the problem is we're all saying things that are sort of related but not really. I agree and you are correct-- it is a minority. But that minority is all it takes, in my opinion, to discredit the comparison between muslim women (as a whole, which includes the minority) and nuns. UNLESS, you're comparing Muslim Women who live in Countries/areas where they CHOOSE to wear the headcovering and Nuns, in which case, I agree.

[xtc]

Please don't turn this into an issue of personal feminism, etc. I don't have ANY problems with headcoverings, at all, when worn voluntarily or required after a knowledgable decision has been made in regards to joining a religious group/order.

If any decision to enter a religious order was knowledgeable, no one would join.


I think the problem is we're all saying things that are sort of related but not really. I agree and you are correct-- it is a minority. But that minority is all it takes, in my opinion, to discredit the comparison between muslim women (as a whole, which includes the minority) and nuns. UNLESS, you're comparing Muslim Women who live in Countries/areas where they CHOOSE to wear the headcovering and Nuns, in which case, I agree.

My point was that I know many women in the west believe that Muslim woman are forced to wear the Nakib or the Hijab. The thought process, outlooks and ideals of many Muslim women are very different from Western woman.

Coming from a Muslim family I do have some personal insight into this. Many of my aunts believe that a man is in charge of a family and it isn't her place to question her husband ONCE a decision had been made. Not a very western outlook. My point was simply it may be tough for western woman to relate to the thinking of many Muslim women.

Most of them wear the Hijab in certain circumstances. None of them wear the Nakib. The Hijab is a head scarf and the Nakib is the head and face covering where you can only see the eyes. Some are more liberal, some are more observant.

[Gan]

Found it..



A niqāb (Arabic نِقاب) is a veil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil) which covers the face, worn by some Muslim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim) women as a part of sartorial hijāb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab). It is popular in the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Gulf) but it can also be found in North Africa, Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niqab

Worst case scenario is the Burqa...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/burqa

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

My point was that I know many women in the west believe that Muslim woman are forced to wear the Nakib or the Hijab. The thought process, outlooks and ideals of many Muslim women are very different from Western woman.

Coming from a Muslim family I do have some personal insight into this. Many of my aunts believe that a man is in charge of a family and it isn't her place to question her husband ONCE a decision had been made. Not a very western outlook. My point was simply it may be tough for western woman to relate to the thinking of many Muslim women.

Most of them wear the Hijab in certain circumstances. None of them wear the Nakib. The Hijab is a head scarf and the Nakib is the head and face covering where you can only see the eyes. Some are more liberal, some are more observant.

What I'm saying is don't attribute a western woman's view of it as being affected only by her own lifestyle just because she's a western woman. My own religion/views has nothing to do with how I view the use of veils, nor does my own opinion on gender roles, etc effect how I see this issue. To me it's not a matter of how do I relate-- nor did I ever make that an issue. It's a matter of a wrong metaphor.

[Sean]

So then you aren't one of the "many" women in the west he's refering to...

[ElanthianSiren]

I've read accounts by Muslim women stating that they feel safer in their veils, like they are a portable kind of "private home". I've found many fascinating and have enjoyed veiling (simply because I find it beautiful on an aesthetic level). For these women, more power to them. If they love their veils, they should wear them with pride.

I find more interesting the fact that this particular cleric feels the need to make excuses for the weak will of his religion's male followers. Imagine presenting the premise that humans can't see knives every day without going homocidal. Objectification always makes me chuckle; even moreso when you run with the train of thought. Are Muslim men really so out of touch with control? IMO It says quite a bit about the cleric himself.

-M

[Latrinsorm]

If any decision to enter a religious order was knowledgeable, no one would join.Smarter people than you and I have joined religious orders. Though your statement is a grave miscalculation in and of itself, what I find most remarkable about it is it's extremely analogous to the position you find so distasteful among "western" women; that which decries the wearing of head-coverings per se.

[Skirmisher]

What it tells me is that the cleric may simply be unused to or just flat out bad at arguing the case for his religious viewpoints among those able to disagree without fear of his standing and ability to ostracize them.

Get a new PR man.

[Gan]

What it tells me is that the cleric may simply be unused to or just flat out bad at arguing the case for his religious viewpoints among those able to disagree without fear of his standing and ability to ostracize them.

Get a new PR man.


More like give him a new driver, someone who will bring him to 2006.

[Apathy]

Is gang rape legal in Iran?

[Tolwynn]

Imagine presenting the premise that humans can't see knives every day without going homocidal.

How about cartoons?

[Artha]

Is gang rape legal in Iran?
Do they do Sharia?

If so, then the guys just claim the woman is lieing and she gets killed (possibly by stoning?) for lieing about rape.

[xtc]

Smarter people than you and I have joined religious orders. Though your statement is a grave miscalculation in and of itself, what I find most remarkable about it is it's extremely analogous to the position you find so distasteful among "western" women; that which decries the wearing of head-coverings per se.

Among some, intelligence seems impotent in the face of irrational religious belief. The difference between myself and SOME western women is that I am not ignorant of Christian religious belief. I went to Church regularly as a child (as well as Mosque). I have spent time in a Priory, I know Anglican Ministers and Monks. Most are very decent, honest who I enjoy spending time with. However I have never understood their belief, perhaps in that fashion I am analogous in some way to SOME western women.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Among some, intelligence seems impotent in the face of irrational religious belief. The difference between myself and SOME western women is that I am not ignorant of Christian religious belief. I went to Church regularly as a child (as well as Mosque). I have spent time in a Priory, I know Anglican Ministers and Monks. Most are very decent, honest who I enjoy spending time with. However I have never understood their belief, perhaps in that fashion I am analogous in some way to SOME western women.

Just because you find it irrational doesn't mean others do. While they can't prove that there actually is God/Allah/etc, you can't prove that there isn't. Therefore, that comes down to a matter of faith which is faith, and not science, for a reason. If it's not proven one way or another, it's *just* as stupid to disagree without proof as it is to agree without proof. And even then, those who agree have things such as Pascal's wager to back them up on their faith.

[Latrinsorm]

I've been learning at the feet of a master sociologist recently, and he claims that while it is impossible to prove the existence of God, it is possible to disprove it. However, his argument isn't especially convincing. What he basically does is assume that nothing transcendent exists and then see if things like religion's persistence still make sense. He certainly advances a plausible case for the true truth of religion (Durkheim factors in very heavily here), but so far he hasn't shown how we can go from "it's plausible for God not to exist (in the usual sense)" to "God does not exist (in the usual sense)".
However I have never understood their belief, perhaps in that fashion I am analogous in some way to SOME western women.That is exactly what I was referring to, yes.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

but so far he hasn't shown how we can go from "it's plausible for God not to exist (in the usual sense)" to "God does not exist (in the usual sense)"

That's pretty much how I meant it. It hasn't been scientifically dispelled and disproven.

[xtc]

Just because you find it irrational doesn't mean others do. While they can't prove that there actually is God/Allah/etc, you can't prove that there isn't. Therefore, that comes down to a matter of faith which is faith, and not science, for a reason. If it's not proven one way or another, it's *just* as stupid to disagree without proof as it is to agree without proof. And even then, those who agree have things such as Pascal's wager to back them up on their faith.

You are correct I can't prove there isn't a God however I find it irrational to believe in something you can't prove exists....but that is just me.

[Latrinsorm]

Can you prove Narcissiia exists? :)

[xtc]

Can you prove Narcissiia exists? :)


I won't be sucked into an argument about the existence of God. This thread has been side tracked far enough…..but good try :)

[HarmNone]

I won't be sucked into an argument about the existence of God. This thread has been side tracked far enough…..but good try :)

Thanks, xtc. Let's keep this discussion on topic, please.