Speech: IQ^2 Debate (BBC World)

 

On the 7th of November, I had the honour of debating with the likes of Julian Burnside, Uthman Badar and Thomas Keneally on a pretty interesting topic: whether God and His Prophets should be protected against insult.

I was pretty nervous and excited about the affair, as can be seen in blog posts here prior to the event.

The debated was screened on BBC World to an audience of about 70 million on the last weekend of November, and you can check out the video here.

This is the transcript of the speech...

***

God / The All-Compassionate / The All-Merciful / The Source of Peace / The Creator / The Maker of Order / The Shaper of Beauty The Forgiving / The Knowing of All…

And then we have us.  Flawed, fallible, full of passion and fire, and so very…human.

How can we deign to think that we – the creatures that we are – should protect God from insult?

Good evening ladies and gentlemen

The topic we have before us today is ‘that God and His Prophets should be protected against insult’.

Tom Keneally and I effectively are arguing against this hypothesis.  From a definitional point of view, the topic is understood as follows:

‘God’, in monotheistic religions, is taken to mean ‘the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being’.

The word is also sometimes used for emphasis to express a particular emotion, such as “God, what happened here?!” although that is not always approved by everybody.

‘Prophet’ is ‘a person regarded as an inspired teacher or proclaimer of the will of God’.

‘Should’ is used to indicate obligation or duty.

‘Protect’ is to keep safe from harm or injury.

‘Insult’, in its noun form, is a disrespectful or scornful remark.

***

There are a couple of interesting questions that this topic raises.

What (or who) deserves our protection, as individuals and as society?  Should we be protected only from things that will harm or things that have the potential to cause harm?

On the other hand when it comes to insult it must be asked: Is freedom, or freedom of speech absolute?  It clearly isn’t, as the existence of laws, rules and regulations mean that there are levels of restrictions on what we can and cannot express.

What is the difference between freedom of speech and expression, and the allowance for insult or incitement of hatred? What is the difference between the two? If freedoms are not actually absolute but do come with restrictions, what limits do we have? Who upholds these limits?  How does freedom fit around the concepts of responsibility and society?

***

Tom and I will be tackling this topic from different perspectives.

I will address three arguments.

Firstly, I will posit that God, as a supreme being, does not require the protection of mere humans to protect Him from any harm or injury.  Where the damage is being inflicted is on the followers, and so protection, if any, is more about the practitioners of the religion.  Furthermore, if God is known to be above insult, then what is the anger really about? It is there something else going on?

Secondly, I will argue that freedom of expression is important to sustain a functioning, thriving, growing society and that said freedom is protected within religions.  This does however, come with important caveats if we are to live in a functioning civilisation.

Thirdly, I will wrap up by addressing violence as a response to insult.  This is unequivocally unacceptable, although perhaps unfortunately, understandable.  I will humbly suggest that the end does not justify the means, and that in any response to insult, the best examples should be followed.

Tom will then continue by talking about how the concepts of blasphemy and sacrilege, and punishments for them, are not viable in a ‘free speech’ society and how mutual respect is the only ultimate guarantee of respect for God and the Prophets.

***

The concept of ‘protection’ brings to mind a dynamic whereby the strong protect the weak and those with power protect the powerless.  Do we honestly think that we can protect God and His Prophets? For the insult to be incitement to hatred and beyond, the recipient would be harmed by it.  God and His Prophets are surely above our mere words…

So what is going on here then, beneath the anger at an insult?

When people stand against insult, mockery and derision of God and His Prophets it is unlikely due to the fact that they think the words will cause harm or injury directly.  It is more likely a reflection of the pain they have felt due to what they love and revere being treated with contempt and ridicule.

Mockery and derision are manifestations of a disrespect and a lack of sensitivity.  God and His Prophets shouldn’t necessarily be ‘protected’ themselves, rather, we should focus as a society on respecting people, as we are the ones who feel the pain and hurt.  If we are to live in a civilised society, a level of respect towards what others deem sacred is critical.

There is also the added factor of where the insult is coming from and its intent.  Reactions in the Muslim community, for example, that may seem disproportionate may be exacerbated by what some regard as worsening attitude towards Muslims by, dare I say it, the West.  That frustration may manifest itself in a grievance towards free speech.

What is it we are trying to achieve? If it is a civilised society where we all respect one another’s sacred beliefs, is the any protection truly going to be the key or will it be a band aid forcing attitudes underground?

***

My second point touches on the universal concept of freedoms, and more specifically, freedom of speech and expression.

It’s a freedom that cannot be understated, and it is enshrined in the Universal declaration of Human rights, in article 19.  It is why we are able to be here and I am able to have this debate.

There is danger is presenting religion and free speech as mutually exclusive, as incompatible.  Without freedom of expression, which is a bedrock of democracy, open discussion of ideas becomes difficult.

However, if an insult comes with an intent to incite hatred then it moves out of the realm of simple freedom of speech.   I would argue that incitement to hatred is a different beast altogether.  That’s not an insult, it is a vindictive act driven by altogether sinister motivations.

Freedom of expression comes with a level of personal responsibility.  We are all individually responsible for our intentions, choices, sayings and actions in the community that we live in.

There shouldn’t be a need for protection because individuals who practice free speech should bear the responsibilities of their expression.

***

With that, I come to my third point.

I believe we should follow the examples of those who lived their lives with virtue.  It may not be surprising to find that such figures, such as the Prophet Mohammed, did not demand protection from insult.

On the contrary, he was insulted and abused often in his life.

He never responded to these events with violence.  In fact, he often did the opposite.

There is one particular example that I enjoy.

God sent the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet after what we shall call a particularly bad day.

'Muhammad! Allah (The Glorified and the Exalted) has heard what your people have said to you. I am the Angel of the Mountains and my Lord has sent me to you to carry out your orders. What do you want now to be done? If you like I may crush them between the two mountains encircling the city of Makka.

The Prophet (may Allah's blessings and peace be upon him) replied with this:

(I do not want their destruction) I am still hopeful …

So those who have used violence in order to ‘protect’ the Prophet cannot say they were following the example of the very man they model their life on.

***

Ultimately, ladies and gentlemen, God and the Prophets are surely above our insults.  They, if you will, transcend the limitations of humanity and the mere concept of us being able to protect them is irrational.

Furthermore, the concepts of free speech and freedom of expression are extremely important to a functioning democracy, so that ideas can be exchanged and built upon. It should always be remembered though that with the right to freedoms does come some level of personal responsibility.

Moreover, violence is an unacceptable form of protection in any situation, particularly when it comes to religion and spirituality. So even in the face of insult, which may be hurtful and derogatory, we would do well to respond in the best way possible, not only in the interests of civilisation but in the interests of showing the best sides of what faith can provide.

***

16:125 Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best…

Reflection

Check out my reflections on the event here!

What are your thoughts?

Cheers,

Yassmin Abdel-Magied

Airing of the IQ Squared debate on BBC World!

 

You may remember a little while ago my mentioning the debate whether "God and His Prophets should be protected against insult" that I was being a part of.

I got an email a few days ago informing me that it will be shown four times globally on BBC World News this weekend (OMG!) at the following times (GMT).

Times in GMT are as follows:

30th November   09.10, 20.10 1st December    02.10, 15.10

The estimated audience will be 70-80 million.

Slap it in your diaries yo and tell me what you think!

I will be posting the video and transcript of my speech shortly after it is broadcast.

Khair inshallah!!!

Cheers,

Yassmin Abdel-Magied

Links, Links, Links! 17th November 2013

Here are a few great pieces I came across on the internet this week:

***

"The Logic of Stupid Poor People"

Why do poor people make stupid, illogical decisions to buy status symbols? For the same reason all but only the most wealthy buy status symbols, I suppose. We want to belong. And, not just for the psychic rewards, but belonging to one group at the right time can mean the difference between unemployment and employment, a good job as opposed to a bad job, housing or a shelter, and so on. Someone mentioned on twitter that poor people can be presentable with affordable options from Kmart. But the issue is not about being presentable. Presentable is the bare minimum of social civility. It means being clean, not smelling, wearing shirts and shoes for service and the like. Presentable as a sufficient condition for gainful, dignified work or successful social interactions is a privilege. It’s the aging white hippie who can cut the ponytail of his youthful rebellion and walk into senior management while aging black panthers can never completely outrun the effects of stigmatization against which they were courting a revolution. Presentable is relative and, like life, it ain’t fair.

 ***

The not-so-secret secrets to success

We imagine ultra-successful individuals being endowed with almost superhuman talents. In so doing, we surround greatness with a certain kind of mystique and deem it somewhat inaccessible to the average person. However, success is not contingent on having extraordinary, innate ability. Nor does greatness depend upon some mysterious approach to life. There are no secrets to success—only simple truths, principles, and disciplines that have been around for thousands of years. Sadly, we obscure the reality of success by making a number of misjudgments about it.

***

The Lost Female Scholars of Islam

Dr Akram Nadwi is soon to publish his 40-volume collection on Muslim women scholars.  In 2007, Mehrunisha Suleman and Afaaf Rajbee analysed the lost legacy of women scholars and its impact on today's world in emel's feature on The Lost Female Scholars of Islam.

...

Since women today participate so little in the teaching of Hadith and the issuing of fatwas, there is a wide misconception that historically they have never played this role. As Shaykh Akram describes, “when I started, I thought there may be thirty to forty women,” but as the study progressed, the accounts of female scholars kept growing and growing, until eventually there were no less than 8,000 biographical accounts to be found. Such vast numbers truly testify to the huge role that women have played in the preservation and development of Islamic learning since the time of the blessed Prophet Muhammad. The women encountered by Shaykh Akram were far from mediocre when compared to men, indeed, some excelled far beyond their male contemporaries. There were exceptional women who not only actively participated in society but also actively reformed it. Most striking was the high calibre of their intellectual achievements and the respect that they received for this.

***

Senator Nova Peris's Maiden Speech

It is what it is. The past is the past and no matter how hard we try we cannot change that history.

But let’s start to undo the wrongs with what is right and just. I urge all my Parliamentary colleagues to become champions for the recognition of Australia’s first nations people in our constitution.

To Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples this has always been part of our story of struggle, injustice and heartache. But we are here today – I am here today – because of this history. Aboriginal Australians are symbolic of triumph over adversity. We represent knowledge and wisdom held in land and country.

Because in our hearts we know that we do not own Mother Earth, the Earth owns us.

As a child growing up, I dreamt big.

Most people would have looked at an Aboriginal girl from the Territory, where the statistics of alcohol abuse, youth suicide, domestic violence, imprisonment rates and sub-standard education point to every reason why you should not succeed.

But I was determined to be successful.

And yes I am a product of that history, and I continue to live in a society whereby the odds are stacked against Aboriginal people.

***

Abbott's new world order

As a senior executive with one of the charities says: ''I wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat, worried that one day we may have to face a royal commission and have to answer for the conditions under which these people were treated and which we didn't have the guts to challenge the government on.''

***

Economics students demand an education that reflects post-crash world

The economic crash brought back a host of long-forgotten truths, or rather lack of truths, as academic economics closed itself away from the beauty of competing, different ideas. Classroom economics failed to adapt itself to the essence of the world and fails to search for its own failures, to seek and wrestle with new truths.

We now have an opportunity to extend economics beyond the orthodoxies, to reach out to branches of economics that do not allocate resources through simple supply and demand, but theories that directly address the issue of sustainability and aim to ensure people's decisions are born out of social responsibility.

It is essential that future financial and commercial leaders realise the direct consequence of their actions on the wider society, and the best way to do this is by expanding the range of economic thought they are able to engage with.

***

 The Saturday Paper is coming to town!!

THIS IS GOING TO BE AWESOME.

***

Of course, there was also the pieces on this blog in case you missed them, published in the Financial Review and lamenting on what to do with our lives (fulfillment?)

What have you read that you really enjoyed or found thought provoking?

Can't wait to share!

Cheers,

Yassmin Abdel-Magied

Crazy Rig Conversations: Part 8

One of my favourite parts about working out on the rigs is the crazy/hilarious/random/unexpected things people say.

Here are a few of the gems of conversations I have been a part of recently!

NB: In the interests of privacy and what-not, I have referred to individuals as Old Mate, or OM for short.

***

We were having a conversation about various types of dancing. I was horrified (actually, slightly mollified) to find that most of the fellas had absolutely no idea what twerking was.

OM: What is it aye? Twerking, never heard of it!?

OM2: Mate when I first heard the word I thought it was that game you play on ice where you throw that thing… (he was referring to curling). It’s pretty much just hip thrusting man!

OM3: It’s Miley Cyrus aye

Me: OMG MILEY CAN’T EVEN TWERK SHE DOESN’T EVEN HAVE ANYTHING THERE

They didn’t really understand why I was so upset about that. Actually…I don’t think I understand either…damn you Miley!

***

OM: Melbourne hay? I see the place as 5 million latte, Frappuccino sipping yuppies really. That’s all.

***

The nicknames that you hear out on these rigs are pretty great. Sometimes they are just a shortening of the person’s names with a few ‘z’s’ added in for good measure, so Gary becomes Gazza, Barry is Bazza, Yassmin is Yazza, and so on.  Other times though, they are a little more inventive.

“We had this one HSE guy and he was really irritable...so we called him thrush.”

“There was this one electrician right, and whenever there was a problem he'd say “oh yeah I'll look into it for ya...”

So we called him mirrors. The guy was always looking into things!”

“There was another electrician who was always asking for something from ya.  Like if you were using something he'd be like “can I use it after ya?”

So we called him Underpants ‘cos he was always on the bum!”

 ***

The fellas were having a conversation about Fiji and mentioned Kava, a drink that is native to the area.  Unfortunately it didn’t seem like the fellas were impressed.

OM: They’re addicted to that Kava stuff man. I don’t know what that’s about, why can’t they have a normal addiction, like to crack?!

 ***

OM: You're a Muslim or a Christian?

Me: Muslim...

OM: Okay so I have a question for you? Why don't I ever see any of the bloody people laugh??! I swear they are always so serious, with this serious face. Don't any of them ever laugh or even smile?!

OM: If I had to live like that seriously all the time, I think I would just die.

I responded, quite appropriately I think, with one of my characteristic guffaws. Touche, one might think...

*** 

Everyone was doing it.

Originally written for Westpac's Ruby Connection

'Everybody else was doing it'...

That was the first answer that popped into my head when asked by my parents why, at the ripe old age of 10, I had decided to don the hijab.  The first answer, but definitely not the whole story…

***

The hijab is an Islamic head covering and an all-round code of dress that encourages modesty and self respect.  A simple piece of fabric and a mindset perhaps, but one that carries connotations and political ramifications beyond what I understood at the time.  It is now, 12 years on, it is an irremovable part of my identity and expression as a Muslim, but the decision to wear it is something that is constantly under question.

***

As I attended the local Islamic primary school at the time, the hijab was part of my school uniform.  It wasn’t therefore a huge jump; I was already a part-time ‘hijabi’ and this was my conversion to full time.  It was the year 2001, and the date I chose for my conversion was November the 10^th.  Why? It was the federal election, and I wanted to choose an auspicious date just in case I forgot.  Forward thinking, always!

I walked to the house door wearing a huge white scarf, wrapped clumsily around my head and shoulders, pinned at the base of my neck.  I distinctly remember my father looking at me with slight concern and asking,

“Are you sure you want to do this? This is it?”

“Yes, yes, I am sure”.  Off I went…

What I didn’t realise at the time of course, was that I had chosen to wear the hijab in a politically charged environment.  It was only a few months after September 11 and Muslims were now sharply visible and constantly in the media. However, wearing the hijab for my 10 year old self wasn’t about political statement or being forced into following a cultural expectation. I believed I had come of age and it was time for me to wear the scarf!  Other girls might have wanted to start wearing makeup out or be allowed to date as a way of ‘growing up’; I chose to cover myself.

***

Why? Why do you do it, people ask. Doesn’t the concept oppress women? Don’t you miss the wind in your hair? Don’t you miss wearing a bikini to a beach?

To be perfectly honest, I don’t think I understood the full implications and reasons behind the concept when I made the decision, however I have settled into it with heartfelt conviction.

***

The concept of the hijab is cushioned in the value of modesty and of personal freedom.  It means something different to each individual who wears it, that is certain.

For me personally, the hijab is about being judged for who I am rather than what I look like.  There is extraordinary freedom in that, especially in a society where a woman’s looks, physicality and beauty are of such ‘importance’.

It is about being visible and proudly so, of my religion and what it stands for.

It is about saving my body and its womanly ways for those who I choose to see it (i.e. the eventual husband! Women, children and family are also allowed the hijab-less experience. The idea is to be covered from those who are marriageable).

That is not to say that those who don’t wear the hijab or choose to interpret it differently are any lesser, let me make that point clear.  We tend to get very defensive about personal choices such as dress.  I have respect for every woman’s choice, and that respect is the basis of all interaction. This is just how I choose to express myself.

***

Yes, some versions of hijab, such as the Burqa, are used as tools of oppression and invisibility in places such as Afghanistan.  However, this is not the case around the world!  Particularly in the West, those who choose to wear the hijab are most often following a personal choice and conviction.  For some, it is their way of becoming closer to God (Allah), forgoing the material obsessions of this world.  For others, it is about public expression as a Muslim.  The reasons are as many and as varied as the women themselves.

In fact, the concept of wanting to ‘free’ the ‘oppressed’ covered woman is insulting to the personal choice being made. It is presumptuous; assuming that one idea of freedom of expression is socially acceptable.  If it strays from such a path, it clearly must be backward and oppressive, right?

Women do not give up their voice and their thoughts when they choose to wear the hijab.

In fact, part of its intention was to give woman more agency and capacity to interact in a society, taking out the judgement of beauty.

I personally find it freeing, and it allows me to be more creative with my outfits!

***

So when you ask if me and my hijabi sisters are oppressed, I’ll likely just cock my eyebrow at you.

Who was it that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011? Three women, all who were covered when they received their awards.

That’s what I thought.

Let’s move away from the conversation of being ‘saved’.  There are thousands of more constructive dialectics to be had – ones were hijabed women are partners rather than mere silent victims.

Isn’t it ironic that in the very act of ‘saving’ women from oppression silences them?

It's #QandA Time! (and the Burka Avenger)

We sit in front of the television every most Monday evenings, cursing and celebrating in equal measure, the opinions stated by the panellists sitting on either side of Tony Jones.

"Oh what!" we yell, out aloud and on twitter.

We all think we would have the perfect answer to the questions being asked too ;)

Well on Monday, I have the scary honour of being one of those very panellists on the firing line and by gosh, with the election just called, it's going to be a fun evening indeed!

I'll also be heading into the studio early to be talking to the Australia Network on the new animation, the Burka Avenger...

I think the idea of the Burka Avenger is fantastic, but it is a little too early to call.

Burka Avenger is a Pakistani animated television series airing on Geo Tez. Created and directed by pop star Haroon and produced at Unicorn Black production studios, the show features Jiya, a mild-mannered teacher with secret martial arts skills who uses a flowing black burka to hide her identity as she fights local thugs. The Urdu language series first aired on July 28, 2013. [wiki]

The program seems to tick the initial acceptability boxes; written by a member of the community, it is clearly coming from within and is relatable.  Programs that cultivate and encourage creativity and artistry are in dire need as well, so that is a plus.

Furthermore, the aim of the program seems to be to encourage education as the superhero uses only books and pens as her weapons.  Encouraging education, particularly in the areas this Urdu-language program is targeted to laudable and required.

What will be important is whether or not this actually works in the community.  Will it be watched by young people and change their perceptions? More importantly, will their parents allow them to watch and be educated by it?  It will most definitely create controversy: given the attire of the 'villains' (very 'traditional', even 'Taliban' looking...) and the use of the Burka as a disguise rather than as a traditional religious garment used for modesty (and in some cases, for oppression, but that's another kettle of fish).  I think the fact that this program will create conversation though is a boon in of itself...

So let's wait and see on this one. I think it is a positive, but the jury is still out on the effectiveness on the outcome - and we judge by the outcome in this world, do we not?

***

So what about you? Ever wanted to be on the panel? What would you like to talk about?  What are your thoughts on le Burka Avenger?

Crazy Rig Conversations: Part 5!

Working on the rigs, one hears - and partakes in - crazy, strange random conversations that usually make me laugh. Here are a few of the recent gems!  Apologies for any offense caused...

NB: Generally, each person is referred to as ‘old mate’, or OM for short.  ’Old Mate’ is Australian for ‘that random dude’, or someone whose name you have forgotten.

***

OM1: You know, I get that women want equality right. But you have to play by the rules of the game and not complain about things? It's like, when a guy who is disabled competes in the normal Olympics and then complains that the result isn't fair - well mate, we made you your own Olypmics, if you want to come and compete with us you have to be on the same level...

Me: Hmm well I can't say I have ever thought of it that way hay.

OM1: Oh well I'm not saying that being a woman is like being disabled...haha!

***

I had a surprisingly educated conversation with a driller about religion. He managed to explain the concept of "Jihad" to a fellow colleague in quite a precise manner.  

OM1: Mate, I read about this Jihad thing aye. It's not like going to war, it's like struggling for something FOR God. Like, say, you want to quit smoking for God, that's your Jihad. It's your struggle.

Me: Wow, that's actually a pretty good explanation!

It has actually changed the way my colleague sees Islam now. #win!

***

A new leasehand (the lowest position on the rig crew) had just joined the crew.  I was asking about his experience.

Me: Oh so it's his first day on the crew?

OM1: Yah, he's from the army. It's his first day on a rig ever!

Me: Oh wow, that's so cute! (as you do...)

OM1: No Yassmin. Puppies are cute. Kittens are cute. We are hard, tough, strong. We are MEN. We are not cute.

Me: ...

***

SBS Online: Getting to know our neighbours

Defining ‘Australia in the Asian Century’ has been the subject of some debate since the release of the Federal Government’s White Paper in October last year. But how much do we know about the neighbourhood we are calling our own?

Last month I found myself in the hot and humid Malaysian city of Kuala Lumpur with five other ‘cultural exchange’ participants and a diplomatic entourage. I was a guest of the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and our mission was to learn as much as we could about this nation’s rich tapestry in one week.

Malaysia is often seen as an exemplary model for Muslim countries around the world; a country with a Muslim government where halal food is abundant and hijab fashion shops sit comfortably next to Chanel and Hermes.

For me, the opportunity to delve beneath the surface was an experience that offered much to reflect on, particularly for a migrant Muslim who calls multicultural Australia home.

Read on...and check out my first piece as a blogger on the SBS Online website! 

I will hopefully now be a regular contributor on a whole random range of issues so watch this space!

What do (young, CALD) women want? Ask them.

Young people are often maligned in our society. Unsure of whether they are contributing adults or dependent children, they fall between the cracks and can often be voiceless in public conversation and debate. Culturally and linguistically diverse groups find themselves in a similar position at times; spoken 'for' rather than asked, 'othered' and objectified in a way by a society that may not fully understand them.

For young, culturally and linguistically diverse women then, the challenge can sometimes seem insurmountable. Not only do they hail from different backgrounds, their age and their gender compound the difficulties that can often prevent them from fully engaging in community and society.

In order to engage young culturally and linguistically diverse women we must first understand that they are not only dealing with the standard societal expectations and pressures of being a young woman, but they are also dealing with often diametrically opposite expectations of their cultural background and community.

This dilemma encapsulates the issues of identity and belonging, as it so often does. Young culturally and linguistically diverse women are currently left to navigate these confusing waters alone, often without guidance, and seem to be expected to do so without fault. This is an unrealistic expectation. These young women should be supported, engaged and empowered to deal with issues of identity and growth. This will enable them to feel like they are part of the community or give them the power to shape their own.

Anecdotal evidence of mismatches between cultural expectations and the anguish that follows is plentiful. For families that migrate from very conservative societies where women are not given the same autonomy as they are in Australia, the idea that this is the norm here is one that is difficult to relate to and sometimes rejected.

This moves beyond the simple and superficial differences that are often highlighted, such as codes of dress. It goes to the root of gender roles and what it means to be a 'good woman' in particular cultures.

For some communities, women’s' involvement in extraneous activities including sports or politics is seen as undesirable. The 'Shinpads and Hijabs' program, which trained young Muslim girls in soccer, is one such example. When the initiative was run at the local Islamic school during school hours, parents were accepting and encouraging. However, when the suggestion was made to broaden the scope of the program and run it after hours, it was no longer an option for many. Furthermore, the final excursion to see the local team at the city's stadium was eventually cancelled as parents were reluctant to let their daughters attend the festivities.

It is quite possible that had these been boys, there would not have been any issue at all.

Examples such as this illustrate the pressures that are placed upon young culturally and linguistically diverse women on a daily basis.

How can we support and empower these young women as a sector to grow and develop as individuals?

Effective engagement with the young women, beginning with families and implemented through schools, is part of the solution.

It is important that any engagement with the young women include their families and communities. Due to the collectivist nature of many culturally and linguistically diverse communities, it is difficult to engage these ladies on an individual basis only and ignore the role their family plays. This collective engagement not only shows respect to cultural norms but also allows for a feedback process that is imperative to improving services.

Engagement through schools is also a natural avenue, as schools provide a platform that is already accepted. Moreover, families are more likely to value education and opportunities provided through educational institutions as opposed to random, unaffiliated programs. The legitimacy that the school structure provides is important, as is the captive audience within a school group. Operating during school hours, as with Shinpads and Hijabs, also allows for engagement programs to be minimally disruptive and more likely to be accepted.

One aspect not to be underestimated in effective engagement is the power of example. Encouraging other culturally and linguistically diverse women to run programs for their younger counterparts and become involved in the process is invaluable. The ability then of the young women – and importantly, their families – to relate to the programmers is enhanced significantly. They are also more likely to accept the program, as it will more obviously align with their own values, a concept which is extremely important.

Lastly, ask. Ask the young women what they want to do, what they want to achieve, and how best they want to do it. Often, as a sector we assume we know the best for particular groups, especially when it comes to dealing with young people. However these young women are smart, dynamic, interested and often have some idea of what they want to do. By asking, not only will their considerations be taken into account but their needs are front and center of the equation and the solution. This focus is imperative and invaluable.

Nothing will happen without some change. This does pose its own difficulties, as families and communities are often reticent to accept or entertain the idea of cultural and ideological change. However, as a sector it is our role to find the best ways of communicating with all of these groups – the young women, their families, schools and communities – in order to provide the best possible solution for all involved and to ensure these young women have their own, authentic voice..

This was initially published in FECCA’s 'Australian Mosaic'.

The Malaysian Moderation Obsession

Thoughts of a young Aussie on a Malaysia cultural exchange...we made it into the paper! Check out my first reflection on the trip so far here.

The 'Global Movement of Moderation Foundation', or the GMMF for short, is symptomatic of an contradictory obsession with moderation in the Malaysian political sphere.

This contradiction has been demonstrated over the course of the Australia-Malaysia Institute's current program, an initiative pitched as a cultural exchange between the youth of the two nations. The Malaysian Government's Ministry of Foreign Affair's determination to include the GMMF along the way has led to the 'moderation' agenda dictating the terms and language around the program and it is clear that this is coming from the top. Why? What is this all achieving?

A more fundamental question to ask is 'What exactly does it mean to be part of the moderate movement?'

In essence, what does 'moderate' actually mean?

This is a question we have been asking as a group for the last few days and have yet to receive a comprehensive answer. It seems that the concept of 'moderation' is something along the lines of 'the middle path', or more boldly, the opposite of extremism. How such an amorphous concept can be a goal however - especially when so poorly defined - is difficult to understand.

What is concerning is the use of the word 'moderate' when it is a word that quite clearly comes with baggage.

It means various things to various people and as a Muslim, the use of the phrase 'moderate Muslim' is slightly...uncomfortable.

Rather than moderate, some Muslims prefer words such as 'mainstream', if we have to give ourselves a label.

'Moderate Muslims' however, to me seems to just imply a Muslim that is lukewarm, or just 'moderately' interested and engaged in the religion. It makes me think - if I am a 'moderate Muslim', does that mean I am not a 'good Muslim'?

It almost insinuates that it's neither here, nor there. Just a bit, well, meh?

Different Muslims have different preferences, but it should be recognised that the word 'moderate' does have that connotation to many.

So clearly, the use of phrases such as the 'movement of moderation' when that is so poorly defined and in fact insinuates a dilution of [religious] belief is concerning and confusing.

In addition, the second issue of note is the corresponding and contradictory moves in Malaysia to politisice Islam. This has been demonstrated by the tightening of particular laws excessively and against the principles of Islam, an attitude which flies in the face of 'moderation'.

The most recent case is naturally that of banning the use of the word 'Allah' by other religions and various cases in family court that are said to terribly disadvantage women. This disadvantage is due to procedural issues and poor implementation of the law rather than of the word of the law itself.

It would seem that even one of the most outwardly progressive Muslim majority nations in the world suffers from the deep politicisation of religion, evidenced in the adoption of the word 'moderate'. It is a word that the West love, as it is nice and not-extremist-scary. A nation that adopts this position will be internationally favoured.

Domestically however, the opposite is true. Political leaders use the religion to justify their actions in order to try gain the domestic Muslim internal support they desire.

It is an interesting situation indeed...

***

Politicisation of religion is difficult to fight without true, just, fair education, and that includes proper religious eduation that focuses not on the rituals of a religion but the spirit behind the words.

When Muslims are properly educated themselves as to their rights, responsibilities and duties as good Muslims, the true spirit of Islam - which is like any religion, lauding peace, mercy, forgiveness, et. al. - will shine through.

After all, Muslims are told to walk the 'middle path'...

Ironic, la?

Malaysia's Identity Issues.

Why the sudden interest in Malaysia? As part of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's Cultural Exchange program, six young Muslims from Australia are partaking in an exchange program in order to deepen cultural understanding. I have the immense honour of being one of the participants of said initiative.

Traveling through Kuala Lumpur over the last couple of days and engaging in deep and meaningful conversations with various Malaysians has been an enlightening experience indeed.

What has emerged from the conversations?

To an outsider, it seems there is an underlying undercurrent of confusion and frustration in the Malaysian population about identity, politics and religion.

***

It is important to start with the understanding that Malaysia is made up of three main ethnic groups; Malays, Chinese and Indian.

The Malays are the majority, and they are also defined in the nation's constitution as those who are Muslim and speak Bahasa Maleyu.

If you are Malay, you are entitled to many privileges under the 'Bumiputera' policies.

This leads to an interesting dilemma.

1. If a nation is seeking to be truly multicultural, an affirmative action law that racially privileges one over the others makes life difficult for those in the minority (Malays make up just under 60% of the population). What then is a 'Malaysian' exactly?

2. If the criteria to be a Malay includes being a Muslim, how does a nation separate 'Mosque' and 'State'? Does the religion simply become part of an identity of a race rather than a true spiritual practice? How do minorities fit in a society that only 'accepts' one standard version of Islam?

These are the two questions that have been at the root of many of our conversations. It seems clear that the issues are far from resolved, and the results of the recent election raise more questions than they answer.

***

There is much more to be said and shared, but this is only the beginning of the program, and I am weary of making judgements that may be unfair.

Observationally though, it seems there is an insecurity around the idea of identity, of what it means to be 'Malaysian', both individially for Malaysians and for the nation itself. It is clearly still a country that is journeying through the nation building process.

What is concerning is the politicisation of Islam and the use of the religion for political gain, or on seemingly superficial matters. This is one such example.

What this means for the future of the nation, particularly one where the opposition is a coalition of the PKR, PAS and DAP parties (i.e. Muslim Malays and Chinese Malaysians who are varied) is interesting and unknown.

***

I will no doubt learn and reflect more as the week goes by. What are your thoughts though, on how Malaysia deals with the issues of identity, as a nation and individually?

Insane, sickening attacks: Let's not let 'them' win.

This article in The Conversation strikes an appropriate tone: Terror on the Streets of London, but don't jump to conclusions yet.

If you haven't heard yet, there has been a random and vicious attack in broad daylight on the streets of London, where a man (believed to be a soldier) has been hacked to death in a busy street.

Aljazeera has more details here: 'Soldier hacked to in London'.

The incident is being called a 'terrorist attack', the likes of which 'we have seen before' by news and politicians in the UK (that quote by London Mayer, Boris Johnson).

***

This is a sickening, terrible attack and one that is sure to garner much media attention, speculation and a strong backlash in London itself due to the demographics of the super-metropolis. It is interesting that even though atrocities are being committed in Syria daily, we become desensitised...

...but the streets of London are not a warzone, and the attack happened near the gates of a primary school.

***

For those who will premetively speculate or link the attack to Islam, stop.

We (as a society in general) must not let sick violence hijack our peace and work towards harmony. We (as Muslims) must not let people commit terror in the name of the religion that we believe in and stay silent.

Islam explicitly forbids killing innocents.

"Nor take life -- which Allah has made sacred -- except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand retaliation or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life, for he is helped (by the Law)." [Quran 17:33]

Thus the term 'Muslim Terrorist' is an oxy moron (see more on this here).

It is a shame that every time there is attack we (as Muslims) must go on the offensive, denying any link, defending our religion. It is frustrating that we must constantly justify our way of life and our beliefs.

Unfortunately though, this seems to be the status quo.

In a world where Islam and the cultures of the East are 'Othered' and misunderstood, is it the responsibility of Muslims living in the West to educate on the true values underpinning the religion? Perhaps. But it can also be exhausting.

In the Aljazeera article, a Muslim resident of the area echoed similar sentiments:

"This has nothing to do with Islam, this has nothing to do with our religion. This has nothing to do with Allah," he said. It's heartbreaking, it's heartbreaking."

Defenses aside though, the purpose of the attack is still unconfirmed.

I think a harder question that must be asked though is why.

Why do young men feel the need to commit such acts of terror??

What sickness is in our society, what are we missing, that allows such motivations to exist and fester into action? Be it the numerous shootings in the United States or even Norway, to the hacking attack in London; these are not the results of well balanced and harmonious communities.

Is it foreign policy stances? Is it family structures and issues growing up? Is it lack of support and understanding as a society as to what young men are experiencing? Is it mental health or the lack thereof? Is it misunderstanding? A combination of all the above?

These are the hard questions that need to be asked if we truly want to work towards preventing and eliminating sickness and violence in our socities.

*Featured photo from Twitter (@BietLe_)