National Fatwa Council Forbids Tomboyism
Bernama (www.bernama.com.my) - 23/10/08
KOTA BAHARU, Oct 23 (Bernama) -- The National Fatwa Council has ruled that tomboyism, where a girl behaves or dresses in a boyish manner, is forbidden in Islam.
Its chairman, Datuk Dr Abdul Shukor Husin said the decision was prompted by recent developments as there had been cases of young women inclined to behave like men and indulging in homosexuality.
Parents must guide their children from indulging in disruptive activities that are against Islamic teachings, he told reporters at the close of a two-day meeting of council here today.
The meeting was held to discuss among others social ills confronting Muslims, including the issue of tomboyism.
The council also ruled that grandchildren are entitled to inherit their grandfathers' properties in the event their fathers die earlier than their grandfathers but the amount to be inherited must be in accordance with Islamic laws.
In another development, Abdul Shukor said the Malaysian Islamic Development Department (Jakim) would formulate a procedure regarding the "sumpah laknat" (swearing in the face of divine retribution), including in courts, to avoid confusion among Muslims.
Thursday, 23 October 2008
"Youth, sex and doing business"
Reproduced from The Star (23/10/08)
"Youth, sex and doing business"
A writer's life - Dina Zaman
In business, it’s not just about brokering deals; it’s about drinks and entertainment, and sadly, who you supply to sweeten the deal. How does one educate business folk that young girls and boys are not to be touched?
A few months ago, yours truly and friends were invited to a little do at a posh nightclub. Once in a while, this writer needs an airing, so off she went with her friends.
Let’s just say the club was a bastion of Malay Datukness, if there is such a term. It was filled with men who smoked cigars, and we recognised a number of faces, all seen in business pages. The men oozed wealth and knew it. The place, situated in a hotel right smack in the city, had been heralded as the place to be seen.
It was a departure from my idea of a night out. Then again, my friends and I prefer quiet dinners with our boyfriends and close friends, so that night, was quite a revelation, to say the least.
The women who were there, I hesitate to say and judge, were not there to dance. They were there for the “kill” as they eyed their prey.
It was halfway through the soiree when two young women appeared at our tiny table. We initiated small talk but they looked at us blankly.
A newly-made male acquaintance whispered to me that the two young women were 16 years old, and were there to look for rich boyfriends. No, they were not working girls. They went to a school nearby.
The two butterflies then moved on to flit on a more prosperous table, filled with laughter and cigar smoke. In a matter of minutes, they were well acquainted with the men.
Women hunting for rich men as husbands or paramours are nothing new. Growing up, there were a few girls in class who aspired to be that: wives of rich men.
But still, as I sat in a corner, observing the two young women, whiling their youth away, as they flirted with the men, and were grabbed at by their newfound companions, I wondered to myself, why, why weren’t these girls at home?
Perhaps I may come off as naive, but at 16, whether one is a boy or girl, he or she should be doing what 16-year-olds do.
Studying, playing with PSII, arguing with parents over why he flunked Maths again.
For 16-year-old girls, they should be playing around with make-up and clothes, and talking about love and pop stars. And, who they want to be when they are 21.
My friends and I left at 11.30 in the evening, to our great relief. I dashed home eagerly €“ a pile of books was waiting to be read €“ having gleaned some useless information from the outing such as recognising the difference between Trophy Wife Hair and Mistress Hair.
But I was disturbed by what I had seen, and conveyed that to a few colleagues who worked with children and youth rights, and child trafficking.
Horrifying stories of VIPs and rich businessmen molesting underage girls waitressing at clubs emerged.
“Hey, I’m a VIP, I can do whatever I want. Besides, it’s consensual,” these men say.
It is one thing to educate parents and children about their rights over their bodies and themselves, but how does one educate the business community that young girls and boys are not to be touched?
In business, it’s not just about brokering deals; it’s about drinks and entertainment, and sadly, who you supply to sweeten the deal.
This is a business truth, and has existed for thousands of years.
The commoditisation of youth and sex has a huge appeal to a number of businessmen. It feeds their egos, and it shows off their power.
They forget that they have daughters at home, while they play with schoolgirls their daughters’ age. Sometimes, it is young boys.
Impresarios of the night know, to pull in the big bucks, young, fresh blood is desirable. Teenagers whose youth and enthusiasm light up the night, and laughter which will ring in the dawn. This underage limit restriction they say they have is just a front. Who does not love a good party?
And parents. Socially ambitious mothers. You’d be very surprised. Nothing to do with poverty, though it can be a push-factor.
A few aspirant mothers train their daughters to do whatever it takes to get there. Sometimes you see these young women, and yes, boys in events and society pages and wonder whether the problem really lies with you, because of your human rights sensibilities.
“Oh, that’s nothing. Wait until you meet my eight-year-old sex workers,” a colleague sighed. Even at that age, these young children already know the power of seduction.
Who then takes care of the children? The state? Ngos? Parents will cry out against the invasion of their rights as parents. But are some parents capable of caring for their children?
In my work, I meet many people. I think I can’t be shocked anymore, but always, something will throw me for the loop.
A young up-and-coming professional bragged to me, how he only beds young girls between the ages of 17 to 19, whom he meets at clubs, because “… they’re cleaner, and haven’t been around too much”.
I read international media reports on how young American girls all want to be Britney, Paris, Lindsay, and think, it’s the same everywhere. Why do I have to make this my battle?
Is my childhood, my colleagues’ childhoods, the childhoods these young children should have? Would these kids want to trade places and play with cowpat, dash into the sea and be chased by irate goats?
All I can say is, that night, what I saw, was wrong. For sure, these street-wise 16-year-old girls would grimace at what we think is the right childhood for them. Maybe they’re happy.
But at 16, or eight, or whatever age a boy or girl is, they shouldn’t be selling their souls that way.
The writer can also be reached at dzawriterslife@gmail.com.
"Youth, sex and doing business"
A writer's life - Dina Zaman
In business, it’s not just about brokering deals; it’s about drinks and entertainment, and sadly, who you supply to sweeten the deal. How does one educate business folk that young girls and boys are not to be touched?
A few months ago, yours truly and friends were invited to a little do at a posh nightclub. Once in a while, this writer needs an airing, so off she went with her friends.
Let’s just say the club was a bastion of Malay Datukness, if there is such a term. It was filled with men who smoked cigars, and we recognised a number of faces, all seen in business pages. The men oozed wealth and knew it. The place, situated in a hotel right smack in the city, had been heralded as the place to be seen.
It was a departure from my idea of a night out. Then again, my friends and I prefer quiet dinners with our boyfriends and close friends, so that night, was quite a revelation, to say the least.
The women who were there, I hesitate to say and judge, were not there to dance. They were there for the “kill” as they eyed their prey.
It was halfway through the soiree when two young women appeared at our tiny table. We initiated small talk but they looked at us blankly.
A newly-made male acquaintance whispered to me that the two young women were 16 years old, and were there to look for rich boyfriends. No, they were not working girls. They went to a school nearby.
The two butterflies then moved on to flit on a more prosperous table, filled with laughter and cigar smoke. In a matter of minutes, they were well acquainted with the men.
Women hunting for rich men as husbands or paramours are nothing new. Growing up, there were a few girls in class who aspired to be that: wives of rich men.
But still, as I sat in a corner, observing the two young women, whiling their youth away, as they flirted with the men, and were grabbed at by their newfound companions, I wondered to myself, why, why weren’t these girls at home?
Perhaps I may come off as naive, but at 16, whether one is a boy or girl, he or she should be doing what 16-year-olds do.
Studying, playing with PSII, arguing with parents over why he flunked Maths again.
For 16-year-old girls, they should be playing around with make-up and clothes, and talking about love and pop stars. And, who they want to be when they are 21.
My friends and I left at 11.30 in the evening, to our great relief. I dashed home eagerly €“ a pile of books was waiting to be read €“ having gleaned some useless information from the outing such as recognising the difference between Trophy Wife Hair and Mistress Hair.
But I was disturbed by what I had seen, and conveyed that to a few colleagues who worked with children and youth rights, and child trafficking.
Horrifying stories of VIPs and rich businessmen molesting underage girls waitressing at clubs emerged.
“Hey, I’m a VIP, I can do whatever I want. Besides, it’s consensual,” these men say.
It is one thing to educate parents and children about their rights over their bodies and themselves, but how does one educate the business community that young girls and boys are not to be touched?
In business, it’s not just about brokering deals; it’s about drinks and entertainment, and sadly, who you supply to sweeten the deal.
This is a business truth, and has existed for thousands of years.
The commoditisation of youth and sex has a huge appeal to a number of businessmen. It feeds their egos, and it shows off their power.
They forget that they have daughters at home, while they play with schoolgirls their daughters’ age. Sometimes, it is young boys.
Impresarios of the night know, to pull in the big bucks, young, fresh blood is desirable. Teenagers whose youth and enthusiasm light up the night, and laughter which will ring in the dawn. This underage limit restriction they say they have is just a front. Who does not love a good party?
And parents. Socially ambitious mothers. You’d be very surprised. Nothing to do with poverty, though it can be a push-factor.
A few aspirant mothers train their daughters to do whatever it takes to get there. Sometimes you see these young women, and yes, boys in events and society pages and wonder whether the problem really lies with you, because of your human rights sensibilities.
“Oh, that’s nothing. Wait until you meet my eight-year-old sex workers,” a colleague sighed. Even at that age, these young children already know the power of seduction.
Who then takes care of the children? The state? Ngos? Parents will cry out against the invasion of their rights as parents. But are some parents capable of caring for their children?
In my work, I meet many people. I think I can’t be shocked anymore, but always, something will throw me for the loop.
A young up-and-coming professional bragged to me, how he only beds young girls between the ages of 17 to 19, whom he meets at clubs, because “… they’re cleaner, and haven’t been around too much”.
I read international media reports on how young American girls all want to be Britney, Paris, Lindsay, and think, it’s the same everywhere. Why do I have to make this my battle?
Is my childhood, my colleagues’ childhoods, the childhoods these young children should have? Would these kids want to trade places and play with cowpat, dash into the sea and be chased by irate goats?
All I can say is, that night, what I saw, was wrong. For sure, these street-wise 16-year-old girls would grimace at what we think is the right childhood for them. Maybe they’re happy.
But at 16, or eight, or whatever age a boy or girl is, they shouldn’t be selling their souls that way.
The writer can also be reached at dzawriterslife@gmail.com.
Thursday, 9 October 2008
Why do men take second wives?
Reproduced from The Star (09/10/08)
"Why do men take second wives?"
A Writer's Life - Dina Zaman
Polygamy has nothing to do with culture or religion. Men, and women too, cheat because they can.
WHEN a male friend told me he planned on taking a second wife, all I could do was try not to choke on dinner. Are you serious, I asked. He said yes, he had fallen in love with a single mother, but it was not his fate to marry her.
Thinking it was perhaps due her compassion, her earnest desire to bring up her sprogs in a Godly way and that life was indeed a struggle, I choked on my dessert when my friend told me the first thing he noticed about her was that she owned a great set of jugs.
Now, my friend takes his religious obligations very seriously. His first wife wears the hijab. So to hear him admit that it was his paramour’s cleavage that caught his heart was quite shocking.
It was due to women like me, whose so-called Western, secular and feminist ideas of polygamy that pushed it underground. I then asked him, whether his equally-pious wife agreed to him taking on another wife, and he said no. She gave him an earful.
But our friend was on a roll. Now that his journey into polygamy was thwarted, it was all our fault. We modern Malay women, be they religious or not, were forcing men like him to marry in Thailand or Iran, where they practised nikah Muta’ah.
He was emulating the steps of our good Prophet Mohamed, he argued.
“You have got your Islamic history upside down! Nabi married war widows, and his first wife was older than he. Aishah was the youngest. And I don’t think our Prophet married any woman because she had great breasts!”
“You don’t understand.”
“Okay then. Why don’t you sell your car and take a camel to work then?”
I’m realistic. I know men who adore their wives and love them to bits, but they can still love their mistresses and other wives. Am I condoning affairs and polygamy? No. But this happens. It has nothing to do with Islam or being Malay, though polygamy is part of the culture.
We’re Asians. We have a long history of concubinage. There are good men who are faithful, and there are good men who have other wives. There are also bad men who are faithful and also bad men who are unfaithful.
Just like our politics, love in Malaysia is a circus. Weeee!
I’m not going to bore you with what polygamy in Islam is about, as it has been written before and talked about to death. Women’s rights activists have long fought for this “crime” to be illegal, but we face a tough fight. Sometimes it’s not the men who are itching for it, but yes, our gender, too.
In the 80s, when I was young and clueless, meeting mistresses and second or third wives would be sinful and against my principles.
These days? “Oh, you’re a mistress?” “Oh, you’re a hidden wife?” Yawn. Wear tudung or mini skirt, got. Educated or stupid, got. Some of our mothers are The Other Women, and are good mothers. So how?
Is this phenomenon particular to our culture? Oh no. Read the British newspapers. Mistressing is talked about to death in feminist columns.
But I thought after that dinner with my friend, I’d revisit the issue again. Some of the findings from my five-sen survey:
> Theoretically ... polygamy is OK. But must ikut hukum Allah lah. There are conditions.
> Ya, but… actually, kan, for career women like us, it does work. Nak jaga laki 24 jam … gue tak larat la. Biar bini nombor satu jaga. After all, in Islam, polygamous wives are taken care of legally. Better a Muslim second wife than a common law wife.
> But really. Think about it. Convenient, what. You see him once a week, makan once a week, have sex once a week...
> Sex once a week?! Baik tak yah jadi bini nombor dua macam tu! Chit. Once a week mana cukup?!
Why do men cheat? Again, just an observation dwelled upon by friends and myself. For a lot of polygamous men, they marry good women who fit their criteria of holiness, wifeliness and motherhood.
Intimacy between the men and their wives are perfunctory. It’s make-the-baby-cover-the-face sex. With their girlfriends and second wives, it’s Penthouse all the way, baby. It’s the soul thing.
At least this is what I got from talking to quite a number of married men. It’s not because of the first wives’ lack of trying; they want to have healthy intimate lives, but the bees in their husbands’s bonnets keep reminding the men of the Madonna-Whore syndrome.
Malaysia is not a place for single women desiring Hollywood-movie type of marriages and love. KL especially is a city for marriages and affairs. And it has nothing to do with money. There are rich men who cheat, and I know of a despatch boy who has two wives!
There are many single-again women like my friends and I, who still believe in marriage and love. But I can tell you, should we walk down that path again one day, we’re going down it with our eyes open and keep a part of our hearts to ourselves. Because you never know.
Perhaps my friend, an activist who makes a living entering and staying in war zones, is right.
“We have women like you, me, your mother, your aunt and friend who fight so hard for women and children and yet face a brick wall, simply because we ‘understand’ so much, and forgive all the time, which is why cheating, affairs and polygamy are rampant, to the detriment or contribution (depends how you look at it) of our well-being,” says my friend.
Another friend, Sharizal Sharaani, put it succinctly: “Men (and, yes, women too) cheat because they can. Full stop.”
The writer still believes in love and marriage and wants to move to Corfu.
"Why do men take second wives?"
A Writer's Life - Dina Zaman
Polygamy has nothing to do with culture or religion. Men, and women too, cheat because they can.
WHEN a male friend told me he planned on taking a second wife, all I could do was try not to choke on dinner. Are you serious, I asked. He said yes, he had fallen in love with a single mother, but it was not his fate to marry her.
Thinking it was perhaps due her compassion, her earnest desire to bring up her sprogs in a Godly way and that life was indeed a struggle, I choked on my dessert when my friend told me the first thing he noticed about her was that she owned a great set of jugs.
Now, my friend takes his religious obligations very seriously. His first wife wears the hijab. So to hear him admit that it was his paramour’s cleavage that caught his heart was quite shocking.
It was due to women like me, whose so-called Western, secular and feminist ideas of polygamy that pushed it underground. I then asked him, whether his equally-pious wife agreed to him taking on another wife, and he said no. She gave him an earful.
But our friend was on a roll. Now that his journey into polygamy was thwarted, it was all our fault. We modern Malay women, be they religious or not, were forcing men like him to marry in Thailand or Iran, where they practised nikah Muta’ah.
He was emulating the steps of our good Prophet Mohamed, he argued.
“You have got your Islamic history upside down! Nabi married war widows, and his first wife was older than he. Aishah was the youngest. And I don’t think our Prophet married any woman because she had great breasts!”
“You don’t understand.”
“Okay then. Why don’t you sell your car and take a camel to work then?”
I’m realistic. I know men who adore their wives and love them to bits, but they can still love their mistresses and other wives. Am I condoning affairs and polygamy? No. But this happens. It has nothing to do with Islam or being Malay, though polygamy is part of the culture.
We’re Asians. We have a long history of concubinage. There are good men who are faithful, and there are good men who have other wives. There are also bad men who are faithful and also bad men who are unfaithful.
Just like our politics, love in Malaysia is a circus. Weeee!
I’m not going to bore you with what polygamy in Islam is about, as it has been written before and talked about to death. Women’s rights activists have long fought for this “crime” to be illegal, but we face a tough fight. Sometimes it’s not the men who are itching for it, but yes, our gender, too.
In the 80s, when I was young and clueless, meeting mistresses and second or third wives would be sinful and against my principles.
These days? “Oh, you’re a mistress?” “Oh, you’re a hidden wife?” Yawn. Wear tudung or mini skirt, got. Educated or stupid, got. Some of our mothers are The Other Women, and are good mothers. So how?
Is this phenomenon particular to our culture? Oh no. Read the British newspapers. Mistressing is talked about to death in feminist columns.
But I thought after that dinner with my friend, I’d revisit the issue again. Some of the findings from my five-sen survey:
> Theoretically ... polygamy is OK. But must ikut hukum Allah lah. There are conditions.
> Ya, but… actually, kan, for career women like us, it does work. Nak jaga laki 24 jam … gue tak larat la. Biar bini nombor satu jaga. After all, in Islam, polygamous wives are taken care of legally. Better a Muslim second wife than a common law wife.
> But really. Think about it. Convenient, what. You see him once a week, makan once a week, have sex once a week...
> Sex once a week?! Baik tak yah jadi bini nombor dua macam tu! Chit. Once a week mana cukup?!
Why do men cheat? Again, just an observation dwelled upon by friends and myself. For a lot of polygamous men, they marry good women who fit their criteria of holiness, wifeliness and motherhood.
Intimacy between the men and their wives are perfunctory. It’s make-the-baby-cover-the-face sex. With their girlfriends and second wives, it’s Penthouse all the way, baby. It’s the soul thing.
At least this is what I got from talking to quite a number of married men. It’s not because of the first wives’ lack of trying; they want to have healthy intimate lives, but the bees in their husbands’s bonnets keep reminding the men of the Madonna-Whore syndrome.
Malaysia is not a place for single women desiring Hollywood-movie type of marriages and love. KL especially is a city for marriages and affairs. And it has nothing to do with money. There are rich men who cheat, and I know of a despatch boy who has two wives!
There are many single-again women like my friends and I, who still believe in marriage and love. But I can tell you, should we walk down that path again one day, we’re going down it with our eyes open and keep a part of our hearts to ourselves. Because you never know.
Perhaps my friend, an activist who makes a living entering and staying in war zones, is right.
“We have women like you, me, your mother, your aunt and friend who fight so hard for women and children and yet face a brick wall, simply because we ‘understand’ so much, and forgive all the time, which is why cheating, affairs and polygamy are rampant, to the detriment or contribution (depends how you look at it) of our well-being,” says my friend.
Another friend, Sharizal Sharaani, put it succinctly: “Men (and, yes, women too) cheat because they can. Full stop.”
The writer still believes in love and marriage and wants to move to Corfu.
Thursday, 22 May 2008
Apparently the colour "white" makes men so horny...
As published in The Star and Malaysiakini
Islamic group condemns 'sexy' school uniforms
May 22
An Islamic group today condemned the uniform worn by girls at government schools, saying it encouraged rape and pre-marital sex.
"The white blouse is too transparent for girls and it becomes a source of attraction," National Islamic Students Association of Malaysia vice-president Munirah Bahari said in a statement. "It becomes a distraction to men, who are drawn to it, whether or not they like looking at it," she said, calling for a review of uniform policy so that it did not violate Islamic ideals.
In multicultural Malaysia, home to majority-Muslim Malays as well as ethnic Chinese and Indians, female students at government schools have a choice of wearing a white blouse with a knee-length skirt or pinafore. They may also wear a baju kurung which is a traditional long top and skirt, and a headscarf is optional for Malay students.
Munirah said that "covering up" according to Islamic precepts was important to fend off social ills including "rape, sexual harassment and even premarital sex which involve schoolgirls in their teens." "All this leads to babies born out of wedlock and to an extent, even prostitution," she said.
"Decent clothes which are not revealing can prevent and protect women from any untoward situations," she said, suggesting that girls wear a blouse of a different colour or with an undergarment.
However, the girls themselves also came in for criticism, with the association saying some used the white blouse to lure men. "This is the source of the problem, where we can see that schoolgirls themselves are capable of using this to attract men to them," Munirah said.
"This could see them getting molested, having pre-marital sex and all sorts of things."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response to this:
Dear Ms. Munirah,
May I first say that though I respect your personal opinion on girls' school uniforms, your recent statement as
vice-president and head of the womens' wing of the Persatuan Kebangsaan Pelajar Islam Malaysia (PKPIM) compels me, as a Malay Muslim man, to write this open letter to you.
As I see it there are two assertions which need to be addressed per your original statement on this matter. Firstly, regarding the white school uniform being the cause of incidences of rape and moral decadence among schoolgirls and secondly, that female students lack of assertiveness causing them to get raped.
Let me say that linking the white school uniform to issues of rape, adultery and even prostitution as indicated in your statement is naive, simplistic and erroneous. You recommended that the colour of the school uniform be changed to remove the source of attraction for men. Do you honestly believe that by just changing the colour of the baju kurung, wearing a singlet within or wearing a tudung labuh (which I presume you suggest so that it covers a girl's chest) makes a person safer? What proof do you have to support the assertion you make that wearing clothing in the Muslim tradition or changing its colour will make it safer or as you put it in your statement, "pakaian yang sopan dan menutup aurat boleh mencegah dan melindungi wanita daripada berlaku sebarang perkara yang tidak diingini." You suggest that the Ministry of Education change the colour of the uniform. If white is not suitable and too , what other colour would you suggest? Blue or brown like a prefect's uniform? What colour would you consider to be less lustful to male eyes?
Ms. Munirah. Did you know that there is a disturbing trend has been observed where a lot of Malay men find it a thrill to have sex with a girl wearing a tudung. Quite a few pornographic handphone videos originating from this country now involve girls wearing tudungs. Would you suggest then that women should not wear tudung? The clothing a woman wears should not and is not the issue.
You mention that the lack of assertiveness by girls themselves makes them victims of rape. You imply that they were perhaps allowing for the rape to happen or even had it coming: "Apa yang terjadi sekarang ialah mereka tidak tegas dan membiarkan diri mereka diperlakukan apa-apa sahaja oleh sesiapa."
The two issues you pointed out (the colour of the uniform and girl's lack of assertiveness) in your statement seem to indicate that you place the blame of rape, adultery and prostitution onto women and girl's themselves. Why do you do so? Do you perhaps think that those women and girls who have survived or have died because of rape were already looking for it and deserved it? It certainly seems so from the statement published: "Di sinilah punca yang boleh kita saksikan bahawa pelajar perempuan itu sendiri mempunyai daya tarikan supaya lelaki mendekatinya."Oleh itu terjadilah perkara-perkara seperti pencabulan, penzinaan dan sebagainya." Are you that sheltered from the realities of life?
It seems that you may not know of the brutal rape and murder case of Noor Suzaily Mokhtar, a 24 year old computer engineer who was raped, sodomised and murdered in a bus in 2000. Hanafi Mat Hassan, the driver of the bus, was found guilty of raping and murdering Noor Suzaily. He was sentenced to death for the murder and ordered to be given 12 strokes for the rape. Noor Suzaily was wearing "pakaian yang sopan dan menutup aurat." Her clothes did not prevent nor protect her from being raped.
Rape is a violent crime and is an exercise of power by men and their desire to subjugage those weaker and smaller than them. The way women dress is not the cause of rape.
By saying what you did and believing it, you are contributing to the misconception of men which excuses them from actions such as domestic violence, incest, sexual violence, rape, molestation. You point the finger at girls and women as being intentionally provocative to men. You indicate that men cannot help themselves and really the girls themselves are to blame. You dishonour the memories of not only Noor Suzaily but the many women and girls who have been and continue to be victims of sexual violence.
Your statement is clear evidence that we must work not only to change the attitudes of men but we must also change the mindset of women acting as moral guardians who are every ready to go after their fellow sisters. As you are also a leader in your own right, I urge you to take the lead in changing society's attitudes towards women by making a public commitment to treat women as fellow human beings of equal worth, respect and dignity.
You obviously had good intentions when you issued this statement and thought that it was your duty as a good Muslim woman to bring forth this issue to the attention of the Ministry of Education. I applaud your concern for the personal safety of women and girls, and I hope that this episode does not discourage your interest in social issues.
However, I must say to you that the result of your environment and upbringing may have provided you with a blinkered view of the world. Open your mind, talk to organisations such as AWAM (All Women's Action Society), WAO (Women's Aid Organisation) or Jemaah Islah Malaysia (JIM) and please don't forget that the road to hell is also littered with good intentions.
Thanks for your attention.
Islamic group condemns 'sexy' school uniforms
May 22
An Islamic group today condemned the uniform worn by girls at government schools, saying it encouraged rape and pre-marital sex.
"The white blouse is too transparent for girls and it becomes a source of attraction," National Islamic Students Association of Malaysia vice-president Munirah Bahari said in a statement. "It becomes a distraction to men, who are drawn to it, whether or not they like looking at it," she said, calling for a review of uniform policy so that it did not violate Islamic ideals.
In multicultural Malaysia, home to majority-Muslim Malays as well as ethnic Chinese and Indians, female students at government schools have a choice of wearing a white blouse with a knee-length skirt or pinafore. They may also wear a baju kurung which is a traditional long top and skirt, and a headscarf is optional for Malay students.
Munirah said that "covering up" according to Islamic precepts was important to fend off social ills including "rape, sexual harassment and even premarital sex which involve schoolgirls in their teens." "All this leads to babies born out of wedlock and to an extent, even prostitution," she said.
"Decent clothes which are not revealing can prevent and protect women from any untoward situations," she said, suggesting that girls wear a blouse of a different colour or with an undergarment.
However, the girls themselves also came in for criticism, with the association saying some used the white blouse to lure men. "This is the source of the problem, where we can see that schoolgirls themselves are capable of using this to attract men to them," Munirah said.
"This could see them getting molested, having pre-marital sex and all sorts of things."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response to this:
Dear Ms. Munirah,
May I first say that though I respect your personal opinion on girls' school uniforms, your recent statement as
vice-president and head of the womens' wing of the Persatuan Kebangsaan Pelajar Islam Malaysia (PKPIM) compels me, as a Malay Muslim man, to write this open letter to you.
As I see it there are two assertions which need to be addressed per your original statement on this matter. Firstly, regarding the white school uniform being the cause of incidences of rape and moral decadence among schoolgirls and secondly, that female students lack of assertiveness causing them to get raped.
Let me say that linking the white school uniform to issues of rape, adultery and even prostitution as indicated in your statement is naive, simplistic and erroneous. You recommended that the colour of the school uniform be changed to remove the source of attraction for men. Do you honestly believe that by just changing the colour of the baju kurung, wearing a singlet within or wearing a tudung labuh (which I presume you suggest so that it covers a girl's chest) makes a person safer? What proof do you have to support the assertion you make that wearing clothing in the Muslim tradition or changing its colour will make it safer or as you put it in your statement, "pakaian yang sopan dan menutup aurat boleh mencegah dan melindungi wanita daripada berlaku sebarang perkara yang tidak diingini." You suggest that the Ministry of Education change the colour of the uniform. If white is not suitable and too , what other colour would you suggest? Blue or brown like a prefect's uniform? What colour would you consider to be less lustful to male eyes?
Ms. Munirah. Did you know that there is a disturbing trend has been observed where a lot of Malay men find it a thrill to have sex with a girl wearing a tudung. Quite a few pornographic handphone videos originating from this country now involve girls wearing tudungs. Would you suggest then that women should not wear tudung? The clothing a woman wears should not and is not the issue.
You mention that the lack of assertiveness by girls themselves makes them victims of rape. You imply that they were perhaps allowing for the rape to happen or even had it coming: "Apa yang terjadi sekarang ialah mereka tidak tegas dan membiarkan diri mereka diperlakukan apa-apa sahaja oleh sesiapa."
The two issues you pointed out (the colour of the uniform and girl's lack of assertiveness) in your statement seem to indicate that you place the blame of rape, adultery and prostitution onto women and girl's themselves. Why do you do so? Do you perhaps think that those women and girls who have survived or have died because of rape were already looking for it and deserved it? It certainly seems so from the statement published: "Di sinilah punca yang boleh kita saksikan bahawa pelajar perempuan itu sendiri mempunyai daya tarikan supaya lelaki mendekatinya."Oleh itu terjadilah perkara-perkara seperti pencabulan, penzinaan dan sebagainya." Are you that sheltered from the realities of life?
It seems that you may not know of the brutal rape and murder case of Noor Suzaily Mokhtar, a 24 year old computer engineer who was raped, sodomised and murdered in a bus in 2000. Hanafi Mat Hassan, the driver of the bus, was found guilty of raping and murdering Noor Suzaily. He was sentenced to death for the murder and ordered to be given 12 strokes for the rape. Noor Suzaily was wearing "pakaian yang sopan dan menutup aurat." Her clothes did not prevent nor protect her from being raped.
Rape is a violent crime and is an exercise of power by men and their desire to subjugage those weaker and smaller than them. The way women dress is not the cause of rape.
By saying what you did and believing it, you are contributing to the misconception of men which excuses them from actions such as domestic violence, incest, sexual violence, rape, molestation. You point the finger at girls and women as being intentionally provocative to men. You indicate that men cannot help themselves and really the girls themselves are to blame. You dishonour the memories of not only Noor Suzaily but the many women and girls who have been and continue to be victims of sexual violence.
Your statement is clear evidence that we must work not only to change the attitudes of men but we must also change the mindset of women acting as moral guardians who are every ready to go after their fellow sisters. As you are also a leader in your own right, I urge you to take the lead in changing society's attitudes towards women by making a public commitment to treat women as fellow human beings of equal worth, respect and dignity.
You obviously had good intentions when you issued this statement and thought that it was your duty as a good Muslim woman to bring forth this issue to the attention of the Ministry of Education. I applaud your concern for the personal safety of women and girls, and I hope that this episode does not discourage your interest in social issues.
However, I must say to you that the result of your environment and upbringing may have provided you with a blinkered view of the world. Open your mind, talk to organisations such as AWAM (All Women's Action Society), WAO (Women's Aid Organisation) or Jemaah Islah Malaysia (JIM) and please don't forget that the road to hell is also littered with good intentions.
Thanks for your attention.
Thursday, 8 May 2008
It seems that there is nothing wrong with stigmatising certain children in Malaysia
Reproduced from Malaysiakini.com
JPN on the look-out for illegitimate Malay children
Dr Yati Hewett | May 6, 08 4:54pm
On the evening of April 7, a terribly upset young couple walked into my surgery. Earlier in the day, they had an altercation with the staff of the National Registration Department (JPN) at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital.
The woman was 18 years old and her husband 24 years old. On April 1, she delivered a baby girl weighing 1.4 kg. She was so tiny she had to be put in an incubator. On the day in question, they had gone to visit their baby with a couple of friends. After that the whole group went to the JPN office to register the baby's birth.
The counter staff scrutinised their marriage certificate and after doing some arithmetic, publicly announced the baby was conceived out of wedlock. As such only the baby's name and the mother's name could be entered in the register.
In the space for father's particulars shall be written 'Information not Available'. In the baby's MyKid identity card shall be entered baby's name followed by ‘bin or binti Abdullah’.
The couple refused to register the baby. They were so upset and humiliated. The baby has since died of prematurity. She never had a birth certificate.
After enquiring from several JPN offices at various places, I learnt that the director-general of JPN had issued an internal circular on July 6, 2007 to the effect that JPN should ‘look out’ for illegitimate Malay children and that they be labelled, accordingly, ‘bin Abdullah’ or ‘binti Abdullah’.
From that day many babies do not have their father's names on their birth certificates.
The question that comes to my mind is WHY? In seven years time, when these children go to school they would be subjected to taunts, ridicule and shame. Not to mention the distress , anxiety and pain of the fathers at not seeing their names in such an important document. Why is the JPN inflicting such suffering onto so many people? Who authorised them to be the ‘Guardian of Public Morals’?
In my 14 years of running a maternity practice, I have seen so many government rules come and go. There have been good ones and not so good ones. But the present rule takes the cake. It makes it very hard to register births. Requirements to register births are so stringent that many babies are not registered. Ironically, rulings created today would only create problems for JPN later on.
Previously, any form of identification of the mother would do eg, the marriage certificate. Now she must produce a non-expired passport and a valid visa. It is a common knowledge that runaway migrant workers do not have those. Without birth certificates, the babies are not adoptable. So babies end up in garbage dumps and the like.
And JPN only recognises marriage certificates issued in Malaysia. Many Malaysian men went to Indonesia and brought back young brides. Their children are all 'bin/ binti Abdullah'.
Marriage certificates are not a must to register the birth of a baby. All that is required is both mother and father sign a declaration at the back of Borang JPN.LM01 (known as Section 13 ) in front of a JPN official. This is provided for by the law.
This provision was taken away from Muslims by JPN from July 2007. As far as I know, this provision in the law has not been amended or withdrawn. The fact that JPN could issue a circular counter to the law is something that should be looked into.
Children are our future. They should be protected. Religious zealots in the civil service should be identified and given the boot.
----------------------------------------------
My comments:
I read the above letter written by Dr. Yati Hewitt titled "JPN on the look-out for illegitimate Malay children" published on Malaysiakini and the response by Joseph Paul and Anak Perelih on Vox Populi. I am just seriously p***ed off that once again the creeping Islamisation of our governance systems rears its ugly head. Religious zealots continue to hijack our lives here in Malaysia. If it wasn't because of a concerned doctor who personally knew the case and did extensive background research on this issue, we wouldn't have known about this ridiculous circular.
I call upon anyone who has access to this circular to share it with us on the Internet. It needs to be condemned.
I am now wondering how many children and their parents in Malaysia are now suffering in silence as a result of Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara's need to be moral guardians for Muslims. How many have 'Information not Available' on their birth certificate as a result of JPN clerks doing calculations as to when a husband and wife had sex?
I am a Muslim and I am sick and tired of supposedly secular bodies (i.e. JPN) acting as moral guardians for Muslims/Malays which is neither in their mandate nor responsibility given to them.
You might ask why only Malay Muslims? Because we are the only ones who can be inflicted on with this sort of thing by the powers that be with impunity. It will be argued (nah, it won't even be debated) that this is an Islamic related issue determined by people who know better. The non-Muslims will be told to not stick their noses in as this is a Malay Muslim issue, which is already happening.
A blogger by the name of Anak Perelih, commenting on this letter, has in fact stated that non-Muslims should not comment on issues which affect Muslims as it might be interpretated as meddling in Islamic affairs. Well, I am glad that my non-Muslim brothers and sisters are able to stand shoulder to shoulder with Muslims in fighting against actions which lack common sense, better judgement, dignity, and respect for the rights of children. I welcome their support any day.
But wait a minute. Does it not alarm anyone that this 'initiative' has come from the JPN, a non-Syariah government agency? Some senior civil servant who feels that he needs to be more religious has, with this action, practically decided that his department should be an extension of the Syariah system.
Let's not talk about the wali business as really no kadi has yet asked and demanded for the date of one's conceivement by one's parents to verify whether or not one's father is the legitimate wali. In this case, this action achieves nothing but violates a child's rights and inflicts pain and suffering on the parents.
A birth certificate that has "information not available" in place of a father is a dead giveaway and a recipe for stigma and discrimination which will be faced by the child for at least 12 years of his or her life if not more. This action is already being done for children born out of wedlock whose fathers cannot be identified. In this case, though the father is clearly identified and married to the mother, it appears that our 'moral guardians' must still insist extracting their pound of flesh.
I call on our Members in Parliament and the Minister of Home Affairs, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar, to address this injustice. This discriminatory, judgemental, circular/ directive must be rejected/repealed.
JPN on the look-out for illegitimate Malay children
Dr Yati Hewett | May 6, 08 4:54pm
On the evening of April 7, a terribly upset young couple walked into my surgery. Earlier in the day, they had an altercation with the staff of the National Registration Department (JPN) at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital.
The woman was 18 years old and her husband 24 years old. On April 1, she delivered a baby girl weighing 1.4 kg. She was so tiny she had to be put in an incubator. On the day in question, they had gone to visit their baby with a couple of friends. After that the whole group went to the JPN office to register the baby's birth.
The counter staff scrutinised their marriage certificate and after doing some arithmetic, publicly announced the baby was conceived out of wedlock. As such only the baby's name and the mother's name could be entered in the register.
In the space for father's particulars shall be written 'Information not Available'. In the baby's MyKid identity card shall be entered baby's name followed by ‘bin or binti Abdullah’.
The couple refused to register the baby. They were so upset and humiliated. The baby has since died of prematurity. She never had a birth certificate.
After enquiring from several JPN offices at various places, I learnt that the director-general of JPN had issued an internal circular on July 6, 2007 to the effect that JPN should ‘look out’ for illegitimate Malay children and that they be labelled, accordingly, ‘bin Abdullah’ or ‘binti Abdullah’.
From that day many babies do not have their father's names on their birth certificates.
The question that comes to my mind is WHY? In seven years time, when these children go to school they would be subjected to taunts, ridicule and shame. Not to mention the distress , anxiety and pain of the fathers at not seeing their names in such an important document. Why is the JPN inflicting such suffering onto so many people? Who authorised them to be the ‘Guardian of Public Morals’?
In my 14 years of running a maternity practice, I have seen so many government rules come and go. There have been good ones and not so good ones. But the present rule takes the cake. It makes it very hard to register births. Requirements to register births are so stringent that many babies are not registered. Ironically, rulings created today would only create problems for JPN later on.
Previously, any form of identification of the mother would do eg, the marriage certificate. Now she must produce a non-expired passport and a valid visa. It is a common knowledge that runaway migrant workers do not have those. Without birth certificates, the babies are not adoptable. So babies end up in garbage dumps and the like.
And JPN only recognises marriage certificates issued in Malaysia. Many Malaysian men went to Indonesia and brought back young brides. Their children are all 'bin/ binti Abdullah'.
Marriage certificates are not a must to register the birth of a baby. All that is required is both mother and father sign a declaration at the back of Borang JPN.LM01 (known as Section 13 ) in front of a JPN official. This is provided for by the law.
This provision was taken away from Muslims by JPN from July 2007. As far as I know, this provision in the law has not been amended or withdrawn. The fact that JPN could issue a circular counter to the law is something that should be looked into.
Children are our future. They should be protected. Religious zealots in the civil service should be identified and given the boot.
----------------------------------------------
My comments:
I read the above letter written by Dr. Yati Hewitt titled "JPN on the look-out for illegitimate Malay children" published on Malaysiakini and the response by Joseph Paul and Anak Perelih on Vox Populi. I am just seriously p***ed off that once again the creeping Islamisation of our governance systems rears its ugly head. Religious zealots continue to hijack our lives here in Malaysia. If it wasn't because of a concerned doctor who personally knew the case and did extensive background research on this issue, we wouldn't have known about this ridiculous circular.
I call upon anyone who has access to this circular to share it with us on the Internet. It needs to be condemned.
I am now wondering how many children and their parents in Malaysia are now suffering in silence as a result of Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara's need to be moral guardians for Muslims. How many have 'Information not Available' on their birth certificate as a result of JPN clerks doing calculations as to when a husband and wife had sex?
I am a Muslim and I am sick and tired of supposedly secular bodies (i.e. JPN) acting as moral guardians for Muslims/Malays which is neither in their mandate nor responsibility given to them.
You might ask why only Malay Muslims? Because we are the only ones who can be inflicted on with this sort of thing by the powers that be with impunity. It will be argued (nah, it won't even be debated) that this is an Islamic related issue determined by people who know better. The non-Muslims will be told to not stick their noses in as this is a Malay Muslim issue, which is already happening.
A blogger by the name of Anak Perelih, commenting on this letter, has in fact stated that non-Muslims should not comment on issues which affect Muslims as it might be interpretated as meddling in Islamic affairs. Well, I am glad that my non-Muslim brothers and sisters are able to stand shoulder to shoulder with Muslims in fighting against actions which lack common sense, better judgement, dignity, and respect for the rights of children. I welcome their support any day.
But wait a minute. Does it not alarm anyone that this 'initiative' has come from the JPN, a non-Syariah government agency? Some senior civil servant who feels that he needs to be more religious has, with this action, practically decided that his department should be an extension of the Syariah system.
Let's not talk about the wali business as really no kadi has yet asked and demanded for the date of one's conceivement by one's parents to verify whether or not one's father is the legitimate wali. In this case, this action achieves nothing but violates a child's rights and inflicts pain and suffering on the parents.
A birth certificate that has "information not available" in place of a father is a dead giveaway and a recipe for stigma and discrimination which will be faced by the child for at least 12 years of his or her life if not more. This action is already being done for children born out of wedlock whose fathers cannot be identified. In this case, though the father is clearly identified and married to the mother, it appears that our 'moral guardians' must still insist extracting their pound of flesh.
I call on our Members in Parliament and the Minister of Home Affairs, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar, to address this injustice. This discriminatory, judgemental, circular/ directive must be rejected/repealed.
Wednesday, 9 April 2008
Legislating morality on Muslims and non-Muslims
The results of a recent Syariah law review seminar organised by the Islamic Institute of Understanding (IKIM) and the Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia (Star, 3 April 2008) have done very little to relieve the anxiety of Muslims and non-Muslims alike concerning the continued perceived threat of Islamisation in this country. Our Islamic religious authorities appear to have a need to incessantly conduct moral policing and persecution of its own ummah. I believe that this situation is due to their feelings of increasing insecurity, a lack of understanding of a population of young people (who comprise 50% of the country's population) and an obsolete and damaging mindset of religion emphasising punishment.
As a Muslim and a Malaysian, I am dismayed and alarmed by the proposals produced during the seminar which reportedly are to be forwarded to the Attorney General's Chambers.
Firstly, the proposal that non-Muslims committing khalwat with Muslims should also be sentenced accordingly in civil courts in the name of 'fairness', is not only possibly unconstitutional but is also a manifestation of a dangerous line of thought found out of ignorance of other cultures and the need to impose, as opposed to encourage, the adoption of positive aspects of Islamic culture, norms and values. That a Syariah Court of Appeal judge and the Syariah Lawyers Association of Malaysia have expressed support for this proposal is an ominous sign that there exists a lack of understanding of the Federal Constitution, of the limits and boundaries of Syariah Law, of the sentiments of both Muslims and non-Muslims in this country who are increasingly frightened and anxious on the issue of Islamisation in this country.
As Muslims, the reality is that we are inflicted with subjective and vague evaluations of khalwat situations, victims of overzealous religious officials, humiliated and demeaned during raids and ambushes, and deprived of certain protections under Civil Law provided to non-Muslims. I would not wish any of the abovementioned on our non-Muslim brothers and sisters to ever experience what some of us have been unfortunate enough to face, particularly of moral transgressions such as khalwat. The proposal to further punish Muslims caught for khalwat, prostitution, consuming alcohol and involvement in gambling activities with heftier penalties, will in the end, if implemented, achieve very little in the form of prevention and deterrence.
Secondly, I am also appalled that the proposals included a renewed emphasis on whipping using the rotan. Whipping has been determined to be a form of torture as stated in international human rights law. Whipping violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).
It is bad enough that as a society and culture, we condone whipping for crimes ranging from illegal entry into the country to drug trafficking. To propose enhanced punishment of moral transgressions or 'crimes of morality' with a maximum of 24 strokes of the rotan is to indicate to Muslims and non-Muslims that our Islamic institutions are more preoccupied with punishment to prevent and to deter. Projecting the Syariah institution as one which emphasises tolerance, understanding, forgiveness and resolution should be preferable to an image of conservatism and hell-bent on punishing the wicked.
I believe that a crisis of faith exists among some Muslims in Malaysia, particularly those who are young people, who see an institution that has become rigid in practice, straightjacket in its thinking and emphasising form over substance. It is increasingly having less influence and, I daresay, relevance, in our daily lives. These proposals will contribute to widening this crisis of faith and disillusionment. This renewed effort to legislate morality is an injustice as it only demonstrates the limited narrow minded thinking of the interpreters of our religion in Malaysia as opposed to the progressiveness, fair, equitable and empowered beliefs of Islam.
As such, I am disappointed with IKIM which is supposed to promote understanding of Islam and is jointly responsible for the production of these proposals. It only decided to renounce the proposals after a public outcry came forth after the media report of the seminar. IKIM has been given the mandate to promote understanding and awareness of Islam Hadhari among both Muslims and non-Muslims in Malaysia. This is not the way to do it.
As a Muslim and a Malaysian, I am dismayed and alarmed by the proposals produced during the seminar which reportedly are to be forwarded to the Attorney General's Chambers.
Firstly, the proposal that non-Muslims committing khalwat with Muslims should also be sentenced accordingly in civil courts in the name of 'fairness', is not only possibly unconstitutional but is also a manifestation of a dangerous line of thought found out of ignorance of other cultures and the need to impose, as opposed to encourage, the adoption of positive aspects of Islamic culture, norms and values. That a Syariah Court of Appeal judge and the Syariah Lawyers Association of Malaysia have expressed support for this proposal is an ominous sign that there exists a lack of understanding of the Federal Constitution, of the limits and boundaries of Syariah Law, of the sentiments of both Muslims and non-Muslims in this country who are increasingly frightened and anxious on the issue of Islamisation in this country.
As Muslims, the reality is that we are inflicted with subjective and vague evaluations of khalwat situations, victims of overzealous religious officials, humiliated and demeaned during raids and ambushes, and deprived of certain protections under Civil Law provided to non-Muslims. I would not wish any of the abovementioned on our non-Muslim brothers and sisters to ever experience what some of us have been unfortunate enough to face, particularly of moral transgressions such as khalwat. The proposal to further punish Muslims caught for khalwat, prostitution, consuming alcohol and involvement in gambling activities with heftier penalties, will in the end, if implemented, achieve very little in the form of prevention and deterrence.
Secondly, I am also appalled that the proposals included a renewed emphasis on whipping using the rotan. Whipping has been determined to be a form of torture as stated in international human rights law. Whipping violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).
It is bad enough that as a society and culture, we condone whipping for crimes ranging from illegal entry into the country to drug trafficking. To propose enhanced punishment of moral transgressions or 'crimes of morality' with a maximum of 24 strokes of the rotan is to indicate to Muslims and non-Muslims that our Islamic institutions are more preoccupied with punishment to prevent and to deter. Projecting the Syariah institution as one which emphasises tolerance, understanding, forgiveness and resolution should be preferable to an image of conservatism and hell-bent on punishing the wicked.
I believe that a crisis of faith exists among some Muslims in Malaysia, particularly those who are young people, who see an institution that has become rigid in practice, straightjacket in its thinking and emphasising form over substance. It is increasingly having less influence and, I daresay, relevance, in our daily lives. These proposals will contribute to widening this crisis of faith and disillusionment. This renewed effort to legislate morality is an injustice as it only demonstrates the limited narrow minded thinking of the interpreters of our religion in Malaysia as opposed to the progressiveness, fair, equitable and empowered beliefs of Islam.
As such, I am disappointed with IKIM which is supposed to promote understanding of Islam and is jointly responsible for the production of these proposals. It only decided to renounce the proposals after a public outcry came forth after the media report of the seminar. IKIM has been given the mandate to promote understanding and awareness of Islam Hadhari among both Muslims and non-Muslims in Malaysia. This is not the way to do it.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
