This is another case of men thinking with their dick pointing to 12 o'clock!:angry_smile:
The Australian — News
Muslim leader blames women for sex attacks
Richard Kerbaj
October 26, 2006
THE nation's most senior Muslim cleric has blamed immodestly dressed women who don't wear Islamic headdress for being preyed on by men and likened them to abandoned "meat" that attracts voracious animals.
In a Ramadan sermon that has outraged Muslim women leaders, Sydney-based Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali also alluded to the infamous Sydney gang rapes, suggesting the attackers were not entirely to blame.
While not specifically referring to the rapes, brutal attacks on four women for which a group of young Lebanese men received long jail sentences, Sheik Hilali said there were women who "sway suggestively" and wore make-up and immodest dress ... "and then you get a judge without mercy (rahma) and gives you 65 years".
"But the problem, but the problem all began with who?" he asked.
The leader of the 2000 rapes in Sydney's southwest, Bilal Skaf, a Muslim, was initially sentenced to 55 years' jail, but later had the sentence reduced on appeal.
In the religious address on adultery to about 500 worshippers in Sydney last month, Sheik Hilali said: "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."
The sheik then said: "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."
He said women were "weapons" used by "Satan" to control men.
"It is said in the state of zina (adultery), the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time on the woman. Why? Because she possesses the weapon of enticement (igraa)."
Muslim community leaders were yesterday outraged and offended by Sheik Hilali's remarks, insisting the cleric was no longer worthy of his title as Australia's mufti.
Young Muslim adviser Iktimal Hage-Ali - who does not wear a hijab - said the Islamic headdress was not a "tool" worn to prevent rape and sexual harassment. "It's a symbol that readily identifies you as being Muslim, but just because you don't wear the headscarf doesn't mean that you're considered fresh meat for sale," the former member of John Howard's Muslim advisory board told The Australian. "The onus should not be on the female to not attract attention, it should be on males to learn how to control themselves."
Australia's most prominent female Muslim leader, Aziza Abdel-Halim, said the hijab did not "detract or add to a person's moral standards", while Islamic Council of Victoria spokesman Waleed Ali said it was "ignorant and naive" for anyone to believe that a hijab could stop sexual assault.
"Anyone who is foolish enough to believe that there is a relationship between rape or unwelcome sexual interference and the failure to wear a hijab, clearly has no understanding of the nature of sexual crime," he said.
Ms Hage-Ali said she was "disgusted and offended" by Shiek Hilali's comments. "I find it very offensive that a man who considers himself as a mufti, a leader of Australia's Muslims, can give comment that lacks intelligence and common sense."
Yesterday, the mufti defended the sermon about "adultery and theft", a recorded copy of which has been obtained and translated by The Australian.
Sheik Hilali said he only meant to refer to prostitutes as "meat" and not any scantily dressed woman with no hijab, despite him not mentioning the word prostitute during the 17-minute talk.
He told The Australian the message he intended to convey was: "If a woman who shows herself off, she is to blame ... but a man should be able to control himself". He said if a woman is "covered and respectful" she "demands respect from a man". "But when she is cheap, she throws herself at the man and cheapens herself."
Sheik Hilali also insisted his references to the Sydney gang rapes were to illustrate that Skaf was guilty and worthy of receiving such a harsh sentence.
Waleed Ali said Sheik Hilali was "normalising immoral sexual behaviour" by comparing women to meat and men to animals and entirely blaming women for being victims.
"It's basically saying that the immoral response of men to women who are not fully covered is as natural and as inevitable as the response of an animal tempted by food," he said.
"But (unlike animals) men are people who have moral responsibilities and the capability in engaging in moral action."
Revelation of the mufti's comments comes after he criticised Mr Howard last month in The Australian for saying a minority of migrant men mistreated their women. Sheik Hilali said such a minority was found in all faiths. "Those who don't respect their women are not true Muslims."
"There's a small percentage found among all religions, but we don't recognise ours as Muslims."
Aziza Abdel-Halim said Sheik Hilali's remarks during Ramadan were inaccurate and upsetting to the Muslim community.
"They are below and beyond any comment (and) do not deserve any consideration."
Source:http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20646437-601,00.html
Another same scenario in Malaysia!
Outrage over fine for ‘revealing clothes’
PETALING JAYA: Several women's organisations are up in arms over the decision of the Kota Baru Municipal Council (MPKB) to fine women working in retail outlets and restaurants who wear clothes deemed to be revealing.
The offending items include tight fitting blouses, pants, jeans and mini-skirts.
Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO) executive director Ivy Josiah said the ruling was unacceptable and ridiculous, as women were always blamed for rape, sexual harassment and molest due their attire, while the men were never blamed for their behaviour.
She said the ruling was a reflection of a narrow mindset and she was wondering if they would stop their nonsense only when the women became invisible.
Josiah said everyone had the freedom to wear clothes of their choice, and that no one should dictate what a person should wear, certainly not the MPKB.
“I would like to know what is the (acceptable) level of tightness of a pair of pants or jeans, and what happens to those of us who have larger buttocks? Is the MPKB saying that we cannot wear pants or jeans as it will emphasise the buttocks?'' she asked when contacted yesterday.
Josiah said the MPKB should instead concentrate on cleaning the drains and parks, collecting rubbish and providing child care centres.
MPKB public relations officer Mohd Azman Daham said that under the local council by-law, those caught wearing outfits deemed indecent or sexy could be fined RM500.
He said the ruling was enforced due to complaints about retail assistants and waitresses wearing sexy outfits to woo male customers to their outlets and restaurants.
Wanita MCA chief Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen said once again Kelantan has come out with a policy to target the women.
“If men wear tight fitting jeans, is that not deemed sexy? Why is it only the women are targeted, so much so that the ruling covers non-Muslim women as well?'' she asked.
Dr Ng urged the PAS-led government not to introduce ridiculous policies.
Dr Ng said that she had confidence that the women working in the retail outlets and restaurants had the appropriate sense of dress and do not need anyone telling or controlling them on what to wear.
Women's Development Collective executive director Maria Chin Abdullah wondered whether the council planned to impose the same ruling on men dressed in singlets and shorts that exposed their thighs, arms and even armpits.
“Firstly, are these gatal (lecherous) men intending to buy products or eat at the restaurants, or are they there to see how the women are dressed? If that is their purpose, then it is an insult to the mentality of Malaysian men.''
The All-Women’s Action Society (Awam) executive director Honey Tan said that Awam was totally opposed to the move, if it was intended to improve moral standards.
Forcing women to bear the burden of morality is discriminatory and a violation of their rights, said Tan.
“It is not the job of the council to become the 'moral police', and if it is concerned about the community it serves, it should encourage men and women to respect each other regardless of their dressing,'' she added.
Source : http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/12/5/nation/16225266&sec=nation
The Australian — News
Muslim leader blames women for sex attacks
Richard Kerbaj
October 26, 2006
THE nation's most senior Muslim cleric has blamed immodestly dressed women who don't wear Islamic headdress for being preyed on by men and likened them to abandoned "meat" that attracts voracious animals.
In a Ramadan sermon that has outraged Muslim women leaders, Sydney-based Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali also alluded to the infamous Sydney gang rapes, suggesting the attackers were not entirely to blame.
While not specifically referring to the rapes, brutal attacks on four women for which a group of young Lebanese men received long jail sentences, Sheik Hilali said there were women who "sway suggestively" and wore make-up and immodest dress ... "and then you get a judge without mercy (rahma) and gives you 65 years".
"But the problem, but the problem all began with who?" he asked.
The leader of the 2000 rapes in Sydney's southwest, Bilal Skaf, a Muslim, was initially sentenced to 55 years' jail, but later had the sentence reduced on appeal.
In the religious address on adultery to about 500 worshippers in Sydney last month, Sheik Hilali said: "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."
The sheik then said: "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."
He said women were "weapons" used by "Satan" to control men.
"It is said in the state of zina (adultery), the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time on the woman. Why? Because she possesses the weapon of enticement (igraa)."
Muslim community leaders were yesterday outraged and offended by Sheik Hilali's remarks, insisting the cleric was no longer worthy of his title as Australia's mufti.
Young Muslim adviser Iktimal Hage-Ali - who does not wear a hijab - said the Islamic headdress was not a "tool" worn to prevent rape and sexual harassment. "It's a symbol that readily identifies you as being Muslim, but just because you don't wear the headscarf doesn't mean that you're considered fresh meat for sale," the former member of John Howard's Muslim advisory board told The Australian. "The onus should not be on the female to not attract attention, it should be on males to learn how to control themselves."
Australia's most prominent female Muslim leader, Aziza Abdel-Halim, said the hijab did not "detract or add to a person's moral standards", while Islamic Council of Victoria spokesman Waleed Ali said it was "ignorant and naive" for anyone to believe that a hijab could stop sexual assault.
"Anyone who is foolish enough to believe that there is a relationship between rape or unwelcome sexual interference and the failure to wear a hijab, clearly has no understanding of the nature of sexual crime," he said.
Ms Hage-Ali said she was "disgusted and offended" by Shiek Hilali's comments. "I find it very offensive that a man who considers himself as a mufti, a leader of Australia's Muslims, can give comment that lacks intelligence and common sense."
Yesterday, the mufti defended the sermon about "adultery and theft", a recorded copy of which has been obtained and translated by The Australian.
Sheik Hilali said he only meant to refer to prostitutes as "meat" and not any scantily dressed woman with no hijab, despite him not mentioning the word prostitute during the 17-minute talk.
He told The Australian the message he intended to convey was: "If a woman who shows herself off, she is to blame ... but a man should be able to control himself". He said if a woman is "covered and respectful" she "demands respect from a man". "But when she is cheap, she throws herself at the man and cheapens herself."
Sheik Hilali also insisted his references to the Sydney gang rapes were to illustrate that Skaf was guilty and worthy of receiving such a harsh sentence.
Waleed Ali said Sheik Hilali was "normalising immoral sexual behaviour" by comparing women to meat and men to animals and entirely blaming women for being victims.
"It's basically saying that the immoral response of men to women who are not fully covered is as natural and as inevitable as the response of an animal tempted by food," he said.
"But (unlike animals) men are people who have moral responsibilities and the capability in engaging in moral action."
Revelation of the mufti's comments comes after he criticised Mr Howard last month in The Australian for saying a minority of migrant men mistreated their women. Sheik Hilali said such a minority was found in all faiths. "Those who don't respect their women are not true Muslims."
"There's a small percentage found among all religions, but we don't recognise ours as Muslims."
Aziza Abdel-Halim said Sheik Hilali's remarks during Ramadan were inaccurate and upsetting to the Muslim community.
"They are below and beyond any comment (and) do not deserve any consideration."
Source:http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20646437-601,00.html
Another same scenario in Malaysia!
Outrage over fine for ‘revealing clothes’
PETALING JAYA: Several women's organisations are up in arms over the decision of the Kota Baru Municipal Council (MPKB) to fine women working in retail outlets and restaurants who wear clothes deemed to be revealing.
The offending items include tight fitting blouses, pants, jeans and mini-skirts.
Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO) executive director Ivy Josiah said the ruling was unacceptable and ridiculous, as women were always blamed for rape, sexual harassment and molest due their attire, while the men were never blamed for their behaviour.
She said the ruling was a reflection of a narrow mindset and she was wondering if they would stop their nonsense only when the women became invisible.
Josiah said everyone had the freedom to wear clothes of their choice, and that no one should dictate what a person should wear, certainly not the MPKB.
“I would like to know what is the (acceptable) level of tightness of a pair of pants or jeans, and what happens to those of us who have larger buttocks? Is the MPKB saying that we cannot wear pants or jeans as it will emphasise the buttocks?'' she asked when contacted yesterday.
Josiah said the MPKB should instead concentrate on cleaning the drains and parks, collecting rubbish and providing child care centres.
MPKB public relations officer Mohd Azman Daham said that under the local council by-law, those caught wearing outfits deemed indecent or sexy could be fined RM500.
He said the ruling was enforced due to complaints about retail assistants and waitresses wearing sexy outfits to woo male customers to their outlets and restaurants.
Wanita MCA chief Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen said once again Kelantan has come out with a policy to target the women.
“If men wear tight fitting jeans, is that not deemed sexy? Why is it only the women are targeted, so much so that the ruling covers non-Muslim women as well?'' she asked.
Dr Ng urged the PAS-led government not to introduce ridiculous policies.
Dr Ng said that she had confidence that the women working in the retail outlets and restaurants had the appropriate sense of dress and do not need anyone telling or controlling them on what to wear.
Women's Development Collective executive director Maria Chin Abdullah wondered whether the council planned to impose the same ruling on men dressed in singlets and shorts that exposed their thighs, arms and even armpits.
“Firstly, are these gatal (lecherous) men intending to buy products or eat at the restaurants, or are they there to see how the women are dressed? If that is their purpose, then it is an insult to the mentality of Malaysian men.''
The All-Women’s Action Society (Awam) executive director Honey Tan said that Awam was totally opposed to the move, if it was intended to improve moral standards.
Forcing women to bear the burden of morality is discriminatory and a violation of their rights, said Tan.
“It is not the job of the council to become the 'moral police', and if it is concerned about the community it serves, it should encourage men and women to respect each other regardless of their dressing,'' she added.
Source : http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/12/5/nation/16225266&sec=nation
