Anti Gender Equality

Posted on June 20, 2006 by Tricia

A friend mailed this to me and I just had to post it in its entirety. Think tongue in cheek. Note of caution:: this is not true, not the views of the author of this post, not written by the owner of this blog (me), and not meant to harm anyone's feelings, as I would do the same ridiculing in good humour my own religion (read: Monty Python). 

First Anti Gender Equality World Conference

12 June 2006

Mak Bedah

Suratkhabar Masakini

Fed-up with the increasing freedom and advancement of rights that have been plaguing the Muslim women lately, a coalition of 42 Muslim NGOs organized the 'Kami Anti Kesetaraan Gender' (We Are Against Gender Equality) women conference. Several international speakers from the Taliban (Afghanistan), Deobandi(India), Lasykar Jihad (Indonesia), Ikhwanul Muslimin (Egypt) and Hamas (Palestine) were invited to share their experience and expertise.

As is the case with most Malaysian ceramahs, devout supporters showed their enthusiastic support. Women chanted slogans of 'Men Power!!' and "Down with Gender Equality!!" and held banners and placards bearing poignant messages such as "Bring Back Discrimination!", “Don’t Confuse Our Minds!". Two women holding hands were also seen with a banner "I love my co-wife" with love signs all over the banner.

Part of the programme was the Debat Perdana between PAS women leader Hajjah Azizah Khatib Mat and Harlina Siraj from JIM. The debate entitled “Bahaya Perkahwinan Misyar” (The Danger of Misyar Marriage) was later changed to ‘Wacana Perkahwinan Misyar” (The Discourse on Misyar Marriage) in response to JIM’s allegation that the title was biased. Some of PAS male members were seen joining Harlina’s supporters in their slogan “Gunakan lah Misyar Tanpa Was-was”.

A man in a “We Want Full Democracy!!” T-Shirt expressed his regret over Azizah’s recalcitrance in going against the Mursyidul Am’s view that allowed misyar marriage. He reminded all PAS supporters that “It is against our tradition to challenge any positions taken by the supreme leader”.

A youth leader of one of the Muslim NGOs based in Kuala Lumpur felt that the conference was timely in view that “the moral decay amongst our elder women is quite alarming. It is shocking for me to see some of the old women in Terengganu (where the conference was held) are scantily dressed in kemban while doing their chores outside their houses. I noticed some of them also engage in ‘budaya lepak’, sitting aimlessly at some benches near the ‘titi’ or at some abandoned ‘pelantar wakaf’. Some of them even smoke!! This clearly shows the negative impacts of Western influence in our country.”

Also spotted were representatives from Muslim Men Against Gender Equality (MEAGE), Muslim Women Against Gender Equality Too (MWAGET) and Muslims Against Terrorism and Gubra (MATG).

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Qur’an & non-Muslims

Posted on June 18, 2006 by Tricia

I read with interest an article in today's Star that reported various views on Matthias Chang's recent case. The former political advisor to Dr. M apparently brought out a chunk of religious holy texts and swore on each of them that he was not party to any dirty business money making. I'll leave the reasons for swearing aside and look at the more interesting comment. 

Apparently, it was an insult to Islam because non-Muslims are not allowed to even touch the Qur'an. Let's take a look at this.

A verse in the Qur'an 56: 77-79 says that:

056.077
YUSUFALI: That this is indeed a qur'an Most Honourable,
PICKTHAL: That (this) is indeed a noble Qur'an
SHAKIR: Most surely it is an honored Quran,

056.078
YUSUFALI: In Book well-guarded,
PICKTHAL: In a Book kept hidden
SHAKIR: In a book that is protected

056.079
YUSUFALI: Which none shall touch but those who are clean:
PICKTHAL: Which none toucheth save the purified,
SHAKIR: None shall touch it save the purified ones.

Clearly saying that non-Muslims are impure and are therefore not allowed to touch the Holy Qur'an. I have to admit this is something I have not known. This poses a problem to the many non-Muslims who are sincere in wanting to seek more of the religion. What if I am a non-Muslim who is genuinely interested in the religion, and yes, perhaps even considering embracing it but am not yet entirely sure until I read the original text for myself? What then? I have to place it on my table and inspect it with sterile gloves? Ensuring that my impure breath does not mar its very pages? 

And how about the paperback Qur'ans that are sold in public bookstores? Anyone can buy them off the shelf. How about the salespersons handling it as they shift them around on trolleys and onto the shelves?

Lastly, scholars and religious academics who want to make cross comparisons with other religious texts. It would make it fairly difficult for them to do that.

Also, how about the Qur'an texts online? If you go about it symbolically, reading it online would be the same as touching and reading its physical book. If one is not allowed to read the physical book (because reading it is to hold and touch it), then one should logically not be allowed to read it online as well. 

But I just quoted three verses of the online Qur'an. Does that mean I have committed a crime?

I don't know. I'm rather confused. Can someone shed light on this?  

Posted in Religion, Theology | 4 Comments

Social Justice!

Posted on June 18, 2006 by Tricia

I find it interesting how religion affects the way people live. Of course, this shouldn't come as a surprise, but hear me out.

Religions that propagate an eternal life in heaven or paradise usually assure followers that their rewards will be gained in abundance in the future. That all existence on earth points towards a single end after life also speaks a message that life on earth is temporal and passing. Further, that the weight of activity on earth holds little worth, as it is not the 'here and now' that take primary importance, but the 'there and later'.

This is also the reason that most activity generated by such religions centres around evangelism, or teaching of doctrinal beliefs. Since the focus is on heaven/paradise/eternal bliss, it makes sense for preaching to take place. This ensures security for the future, which is the most essential, as opposed to the present. Spread the faith is the number one call.

While this is right, based on the premises of the various faiths, this does not mean that the 'here and now' should be disregarded. For example, the focus of other religions is purely on doing good to alleviate suffering. Because there is little emphasis on a heavenly afterlife, all energies are spent on social work on earth. To live life to the maximum in the here and now, because this is all that exists and matters.

So, taking my argument to the extreme, you have the Christians/Muslims/Jews whose primary objective is to spread their respective gospel truths. On the other end of the spectrum, you have the Buddhists/Hindus whose primary objective is to do good on earth and help mankind. Both these objectives make sense from each religion's doctrine.

Now I come to my real argument, as a Christian, to fellow Christians. Despite the fact that we look towards heaven as an end to life's journey, this does not mean social work is negligible. In many books of the Bible, God calls for social justice. Basic verses speak volumes of helping the needy, standing up for the righteous, ensuring that justice is given out in the courts. The book of Amos even calls for the corrupt to be ridden of in the court.

My message is simply that, although Christians believe that the earth is temporal, it is still our responsibility to ensure suffering is eased. What is the difference then? The difference is this: Suffering exists, but God is the balm. Everything that we do should point towards God ultimately. Social justice needs to be called for at all levels because the ultimate judge is Him. Helping the poor and mistreated, the marginalised in society and the prisoners, those who are ostracised and weak – because all are created equal under His eyes.

While we look to the future and cast our eyes on what is unseen at this point in time, we are in the 'here and now', and are responsible for our fellow beings. Let us take heed.

Posted in Religion, The Cause | 3 Comments

Clash of the Leaders

Posted on June 18, 2006 by Tricia

Malaysian politics is getting rather clannish. This reminds me of "The Lexus and The Olive Tree", where Friedman writes the first chapter and tells his readers it is impossible to understand the Middle East conflict without first recognising that it isn't as simple as the Israelis against the Palestinians. Like Lebanon, which has been divided for decades based on internal tribal conflicts (tribes against the other, palestinian christians, palestinian jews, palestinian muslims, israeli jews, israeli christians… it get complicated), Malaysia too has multiple players in its hot and brewing political soup.

The two major conflicts are these: First we had Dr M versus Pak Lah in the recent verbal spewing of sorts, played up by the media. Then we have Dr M versus Anwar, the old fairytale being retold in the courts.

However, beyond these three main players you find the little ones scurrying beneath them, forming gangs of their own, clans within clans, and don't be surprised at the way individuals act for their own interests. After all, the very term politician in itself means smiling whilst twisting the words being spoken. A good politician is one whom you cannot tell is lying.

Under each of the players, Dr M, Pak Lah and Anwar, you have these junior politicians who are either controlling by pulling the strings that are tied to their hands, or trying their level best to gain favour. One can rather amusedly imagine the wheels turning in each of their heads, attempting to predict the outcomes over the next few months so they select the right player to pander to. According to RRK's recent article in Malaysia-today, other main players include Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, Musa Hitam, Najib, Khairy, the State Umno chiefs, and the Umno Supreme Council Members. Of course, he uses a more vulgar term to explain this all.. nobody really knows who is out to get whom.

With all of this political war going on in our country, is it any wonder to us all, that our leaders have NO time to carry out their duties as Ministers and Leaders? How about real responsibilities like caring for the people's welfare, education, economy, and rights? No, nothing of the sort! Just fight to cover your back and you're safe. Quoting RPK again (he's rather humorous), it's like Abdullah tending to goats while Malaysia burns, and a twisted version of Nero playing the fiddle while Rome burnt.

There is a Malay saying: Gajah sama gajah berjuang, pelanduk mati di tengah-tengah. This means that the elephants fight, but the mousedeer get caught and die in the middle. While our leaders clash on a number of issues, the real running of the country, for the sake of the citizens, gets little attention.

Posted in The Cause | 3 Comments

Freiheit Freedom

Posted on June 18, 2006 by Tricia

My colleagues and I have gotten into the habit of debating concepts and philosophies during our brief lunch hour recently. It usually ends abruptly, but this one continued as we adjourned to a good banana leaf dinner. 

We brought up the topic of again, freedom, as I had earlier written about the Islamic perspective of freedom. To recap, I wrote that within Islam, the concept of freedom really means the freedom to do good within the boundaries of Islam. Let me propose that this is a different sort of freedom altogether.

There is a "truth will set you free" sort of freedom, also elaborated upon in the Bible. This freedom is liberating, which gives our spirit a freedom that can only be felt either spiritually or emotionally. I too subsribe to this being real freedom of the spirit, the soul, the being. 

But we have to be clear about our definitions. I think much of the problem in debating arises because of unclear premises. In the more secular usage of freedom, this really means the freedom to choose. Boundless freedom. We have to accept that while it is true that all humans are given the freedom of choice, this may not necessarily be the right nor best way forward. So we can be comfortable talking about different freedoms. An absolute freedom, which is granted to all of humanity – also the freedom to suffer the consequences. You're free to take drugs but you're trapped in it eventually. And second, a freedom that liberates. 

This led me to think about the concept of choice. People who speak with me will know that I am big on choice. What this means is that I truly believe all are "free" to choose, and will experience the consequences (good or bad) of this choice. This extends to how people are "free" to choose their religions. However, does this argument really hold? 

Can people choose their beliefs? Or is a person's belief system a result of the process of socialisation and natural inclinations? By definition, choice means I have the option of one over the other. However, because of the person I am today (a summation of nature and nurture), I would be more predisposed to believe something over another. And I do not have the choice of predisposition A over predisposition B. I am, therefore, more likely to believe that the sky is blue, compared to someone who lives in the Arctic who would believe the sky is white.

The argument this friend gave is that, is it possible for me to CHOOSE to believe that Mickey Mouse is a real character and he lives on the moon? Is that a choice? I cannot choose to believe it. I simply don't believe it. Because of my disposition: being brought up knowing Mickey Mouse is a fictional cartoon. 

Bringing the question to God, is it possible for someone to choose to not believe in Him? If, based on the natural predisposition of someone who is a cynic and rationalist, he simply does not believe, can this be considered a "choice" that the person made? 

Posted in Reflections | Leave a comment

Volcano Erupts

Posted on June 14, 2006 by Tricia

I am missing in action for a couple of days and voila, the simmering volcano for the past months suddenly decides to erupt.

Dr. M came into premiership in 1981. I was born in 1982. That means for my whole life until Pak Lah came into the picture, I've only known one Prime Minister. As a child, I never questioned Dr. M's authority and decisions in the country. He was always the towering leader, THE towering personality that Malaysians were to have clamoured after as role model.

Then came along Pak Lah, successor and some felt could act as soothing balm to the inciting remarks made previously by his ex-boss. Singapore especially would be able to sigh in relief, with Pak Lah as the more subdued and placid man. They made no reservations in saying they welcomed the new PM with smiles.

Pak Lah comes along, gives his promises in a wonderful speech laced with big words and bigger concepts. He wins a great big mandate from his people. The citizens love him because he wants to fight corruption. Indeed, he makes headlines with several people like Eric Chia. Oh yes, indeed corruption is about to be weeded out, everybody believes and pats him on the back, as well as each other for choosing the right man to lead the country (not like they had a choice, you see).

Fast-forward many months. Any other new corruption cases? How about those reported to the ACA? Does anyone see any headway made with other cases? Anyone jailed? Anyone called up? Anyone sued for bankruptcy? No, because the ACA needs "evidence". Their definition of "evidence" for corruption is so narrow it's hardly possible for anyone to report it. Plus, shouldn't the onus of proving corruption be upon the investigating agency, instead of the civilian who is seeking justice? 

I digress.

Little issues start popping out, like those irritating moles that you have to hit with a hammer in video arcades. You have the AP issue, where two men are the sole distributors of Approved Permits for vehicles. They don't need to work in any other employment. Their jobs when filling out forms? "AP-holder". Ooh, that kind of job certainly requires a lot of skill and energy does it not?  Big blow up.

And then our national carmaker Proton decides that its MV-Agusta is a liability and sells it off for 1Euro. That's less than RM5. And the company that bought over MV-Agusta apparently was set up for the sole reason of making this purchase. Very fishy indeed.

Of course you have the whole bridge and sand fiasco. We don't have the full information on international deals and affairs, so I won't say more, except that this was a pet project of Dr M's as everyone knows, and by Pak Lah abandoning it, it rubbed our ex-premier up the wrong way. When you ruffle someone's feathers the wrong way it just begs for a flaring up, a snarling, if you would like.

Dirty linen is being washed in public, and it is interesting this time for the opposition and other NGO groups to see the big display. I personally think Malaysian politics is an entire wayang on its own. No need to pay money to get entertainment in the cinema anymore these days. All you have to do is switch on the computer and you are watching the biggest movie of all time. Plus, the best part is that it is a combination of multiple movie genres: Comedy, Action Flick, Horror, Adventure. 

Now how's that for good value.  

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Vietnam

Posted on June 14, 2006 by Tricia

Vietnam is a beautiful country. Hanoi is still unsoiled by the weeds of capitalism. Although the trend is heading towards that end. A couple of years ago one would not have seen people dressed in spaghetti straps, and today girls skip across the streets parading their newfound modern gear, mostly due to imitations from foreign products. In the name of economic development, surely the country will lose its quaint romanticity that still lurks around Hanoi. 

One observation is that the people look very much to Russia and Korea. Their newspapers quote Russia's paper headlines, and is much skewed in their direction. There are little symbols that speak of their disregard for the American government, no surprises there. Their products are Korean – buses are Hyundai, and televisions are LG.

The people still wear little fishermen triangular brown hats all around, balancing their baskets of vegetables and meat on their shoulders to sell in the city. What is intriguing is the way they set up stalls on the sidewalk, any and everywhere they find a little spot to plonk themselves down upon.

Most amusing to me was the way in which their cars honk. Horns in Vietnam don't mean anything more than "I'm passing through. Watch out". So much so that hardly three seconds can pass without me NOT hearing a horn in the distance.

The Viets are hardworking people. This will be their road to success. While foreign direct investment slowly gets sucked away from Malaysia, no answers as to where it will be flowing towards next. In the next twenty years, where Malaysia loses out, Vietnam will gain. They have honest hearts, a national pride and identity, a hardworking people, beautiful country. With the combination of work and sincerity at advancing, the sky's the limit for them. 

It's so easy to fall in love. With the country, that is.  

Posted in Personal, Reflections | Leave a comment

Right Kinda Freedom

Posted on June 7, 2006 by Tricia

I've written my thoughts about freedom sometime ago when the cartoons incident sparked a wave of interest in what constitutes freedom of speech and expression. Now discussion has gone into other sorts of freedom, with the growing interest in International Human Rights and liberalism.

Wan Azhar Wan Ahmad, senior research fellow at a local Islamic research institute, wrote an article in today's Star which I thought quite interesting. He spoke about freedom from a Muslim perspective.

In his article, he goes to the root of the word freedom. The term ikhtiyar means the power of choice, or freedom. This word, in turn, has its roots in the word khayr, which means Good. What this means is that within the framework of Islam, freedom actually means the free choice of what is "good and better".

In his words, he says that "one cannot separate freedom from rights in the sense that the freedom to choose must always be done for the right, true, just and correct. It follows that a choice for something bad, as far as Islam or morality is concerned, is not real freedom. In this spirit, the Islamic concept of freedom differs from that of the secular idea."

My question is, what is the very definition of "good and better"? Surely every religion would assume its teachings to be the "good and better" relative to the other. Thus, freedom from an Islamic perspective would mean the freedom to practice within the parameters of what the faith allows, that which is enshrined within the religion itself – the practical manifestation of which can be humanly interpreted.

This is tantamount to saying that whatever freedom a Muslim enjoys is to the extent that the "bad" is not practiced, defined in Islamic terms.

Nevertheless, who am I to criticise who too believes in bounded freedom, as written about before. However, I believe in the principle behind the matter. It is the spirit of the law instead of the letter of the law. It is more important to recognise there is a principle behind a teaching, which I can practise with full conscience.

Posted in Philosophy, Religion | 1 Comment

Same Sex Marriage

Posted on June 6, 2006 by Tricia

In a tiny obscure artsy home, thirty-odd people gathered to watch the screening of two films. Directed by Malaysian-borns, they were pretty revolutionary.

The first was a film on same sex marriage called Floored by Love, by Desiree Lim,  who is based in Canada now. It was pretty explicit, the kissing scenes going all out between the main protagonist women, who were struggling with 'coming out' to their parents. Asked why she was inspired to do this film, Desiree replied that there was no movie out there focusing on same sex marriage between two women, so do it before someone else does.

The film either strikes a chord with those who feel empathetic towards gays and lesbians, but also puts the rest at a slight unease. Discomfort because of the issue itself, as well as the visual scenes. A side story was a guy who was dealing with his homosexuality, living with very accepting and open parents. I wonder what I would truly do as a parent.

The second film was a documentary by Jo Luping based in New Zealand, on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: Reframe. It was pretty good cinematography, bringing the audience to parts of the war-devastated city of Jenin and the Gaza Strip that we would otherwise have no access to.

The stories of the kids were the most striking, interviews and pictures with each of them plain heart wrenching. The film also drew parallels between the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the system of apartheid in South Africa based on the legalising of racialism. It will be interesting to observe if anyone picks up on this issue with regard to Malaysia.

All in all, a pretty interesting session. Go Malaysian directors. Break new ground.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Crash & Burn

Posted on June 6, 2006 by Tricia

I got into an accident last night.

This was what happened, in slow motion like a dramatic scene..

Guy makes a U-turn into my lane right in front of me without looking.

I think, "I can't stop in time, I can't stop in time".

I slam down the brakes, I slam down the horn. Tyres screech. Road eats rubber.

I crash into the back left of his car.

I swerve up the high curb. Crash into a Madagascar palm sitting pretty beside the road, bringing it down with me.

I am just awaiting the shattering of glass, me knocked out, waiting waiting for my head to be blown apart.

I slide to a halt and look around, see no glass on my face, see I am awake and conscious.

No one was hurt. Thank God…

Posted in Personal | Leave a comment