Is the voice of mainstream, moderate Islam, or isn't it?

(Hint: it's a trick question.)

Every religion has its share of nutjobs. Islam just happens to have more than its fair share, I guess. You don't have to be an apologist to see that the guy is off his rocker (with clearly no sense of self-preservation).

Of course, many men throughout the world believe this, Muslim or otherwise - I'd venture to say that many women do, too. It's sick, and it's sad, and it's uneducated, and it's tragic. But it's also a maniac shooting off his mouth, so stick it with your smug assertions about apologists and Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taj_El-Din_Hilaly

I'm actually angrier at the Australian government for not having him covertly killed by now. I'm all for the freedom of speech, but, this guy... this guy needs to be taken OUT.

"He has not since apologised nor retracted his comments, in which he accused Jews of causing all wars [11]."

Mel? Is that you, Mel?

Perhaps this guy has put this sentiment more viscerally than the usual religious fanatic, but let's face it. That is exactly the reality behind the veil, behind the ugly wigs on the Hasidic women, on the long flowery dresses in the right wing Christian sects, etc. Wherever women are commanded to keep their hair covered, it is because they are being treated like uncovered meat and men are being treated as beasts. In culture after culture, most of the time when men are wearing ceremonial clothes, it is to glorify their powers, and when women wear them, it is to hide or control their attractiveness. Color me completely unamazedl

info@lma.org.au

But you can email the mosque where Hilaly "preaches" and let them know that you find his rhetoric disgusting. I plan on doing so.

You are not an apologist for Islam, so my original question wasn't really directed at you. I am just curious to see how all the usual suspects will handle this article. We've just seen the "well, all religions do this" salvo fired by Alexandria. I knew that would be a very common tactic, so I articulated a question designed to focus in on the usual dichotomy proposed by apologists for Islam, namely:

Is this is the mainstream voice of Islam, or isn't it?

Sounds just like our Christian fundies here in the U.S.. Rhetorically, they're essentially indistinguishable.

This mufti's statements perfectly illustrate why Islam can be offensive to men as well as women. It's not just that women are generally regarded as pieces of meat, it's also that men are presumed too base or animalistic to control their urges. Granted, Islam is not the only religion to treat its followers like morons incapable of free will, but it seems the most vocal at times. My boyfriend dislikes the concept of keeping women covered not exclusively because it controls women but because it implies men are too are incapable of satisfying their sexual appetites appropriately. This logic suggests that men are incapable of achieving higher pursuits if female flesh is within sight.

Surely this man doesn't speak for all Muslims, but his interpretation of Islamic law amplifies the religion's lack of faith in humans as intelligent, sentient beings.

Nice try, but "that guy" is the senior Muslim cleric in Australia - on his return to his mosque, he was greeted by thousands who defended him and called the criticisms of his words (predictably) an attack on Islam! He also decried the convictions of several Muslims men - convicted in a series of gang rapes by Muslim youths on Australian women - raped because they were unveiled. It's true that Christianity and Judism have "problems" with women - Islam though, seems to raise it to a high art - enshrined in Sharia, and practiced by millions of Muslims the world over.

I won't even dignify the "she was asking for it by leaving the house" comments by responding.

I like to think that our modern world, with its skin-bearing, varying hemline, unisex, white-after-Labor-Day attitude toward clothing is a reflection of the progress we have all made at being able to live together on the planet. The argument that women should remain covered because men can't handle the temptation reduces those men to compulsive savages. This argument is usually raised by religious groups, who are allegedly following holy books of conduct that use morality to regulate impulsive behavior. Shouldn't that be enough? Shouldn't the rape of a woman be cause to punish the perpetrator, who seems to have forgotten all the religious laws telling him that the public will not tolerate his behavior?

Or do they think the religious and civic leaders do not have enough power?

I've listened to men make libido jokes or comments my entire life, but not one of them has ever expressed an actual lack of control over his behavior or choices.

I'm sure most self-respecting men would be insulted if they were told that they couldn't be trusted to avoid committing a violent, criminal act at the mere sight of a stranger with a bare head (or face, or elbow, or knee).

What will it take for them to say it, in public?

Obviously, women should be treated with respect, and victims shouldn't be blamed for violence committed against them, but with stories like this one, it sounds like religious leaders don't think very much more of their men.

Sorry boys, but when you make extreme trollish statements, the burden of proof is on you to show exactly why this is different from the misogyny of any other religion.

Moreover, the burden of proof is on you to show how this is different from anyone who has ever said a woman "asked for it". How exactly is demanding that women wear extreme veils (niqabs or burqas) as a preventative to sin ANY different from demanding that women cover themselves with a wig or a long dress? It's a different garment and that it the ONLY difference.

All fundamentalist interpretations of monotheistic religions view women as objects and men as subjects. Sometimes they express it differently, but it's there all the same.