More prejudices than burkini ban

New Zealand born Lamia Iman claims that we are fooling ourselves if we think New Zealand is a tolerant society.

To an extent at least she is right. There has been intolerance and prejudice expressed (and set in law in some cases) against Chinese, Irish, German,English, Dutch, Japanese, Pacific Island, Asian, Chinese, South African, Somalian, Maori etc throughout our history of occupation.

RNZ: Balking at burkini bans misses nearer prejudices

In response to recent terrorist attacks on French soil, several towns have banned the burkini – swimwear often worn by Muslim women and people avoiding the sun.

This week, New Zealand responded by putting a burkini on the runway at New Zealand Fashion Week.

We Kiwis may pat ourselves on the back for our small act of defiance and its representation of our tolerant society but we would only be fooling ourselves.

Islamophobia is on the rise in the Western world and Muslims and ethnic minorities who “look Muslim” are feeling the brunt of it. New Zealand is certainly not immune.

There are genuine concerns in New Zealand about the potential risks from Islamic radicals, but we have to take care not to over-react to something that hasn’t happened, and we should take care not to ostracise many people in New Zealand for the actions of some on the other side of the world.

Islamophobia is a confronting term that doesn’t encourage better understanding, it isd more likely to entrench opposing views.

We have blamed Chinese immigrants for the housing crisis, barred a woman from applying for a job because she wore a hijab, defaced the billboard of a Sikh candidate running for City Council with “ISIS”, and have barely increased our refugee quota in response to a massive crisis in Syria.

Do we really deserve that pat on the back?

In general yes I think New Zealand deserves some credit but we are far removed from the heat of the problems in the Middle east and Europe, and there have been notable signs of intolerance.

New Zealand actually has a party in Parliament called New Zealand First.

One of its MPs Richard Prosser suggested back in 2013, well before Brexit or Donald Trump’s presidential bid, that Muslim men should not be welcome to travel on Western airlines.

He eventually had to apologise, conceding most Muslims were not terrorists, but then suggested most terrorists were Muslims – despite FBI figures showing non-Muslims make up 94 percent of terrorist attacks in the US.

Muslims make up 0% of terrorist attacks in New Zealand – ironically considering the burkina issue in France at present the most publicised terrorist attack here was done by the French government.

The party’s leader Winston Peters has since called for immigrants to be interviewed “to check their attitude” if they come from countries who “treat their women like cattle”, while ACT’s David Seymour has called for refugees to have to literally sign up to “Kiwi values”.

Both might be talking around race and religion to escape accusations of bigotry, but there is no doubt they refer to Muslims.

To an extent at least they are referring to Muslims, or at least addressing concerns of people who target Muslims.

The primary effect of the burkini ban in France is not reduced terrorism or liberation of women – it is removal of Muslim women from public spaces.

That’s an important point. Some in France claim that the burkini is a sign of the oppression of women with no proof that the women wearing them feel oppressed, but banning the wearing of (targeted) traditional clothing in public may well deter some women from appearing in public. As does public mass blaming.

This might not be successful as it gets tested in the courts but if it were, it would only further marginalize the Muslim community, which can only lead to more radicalization.

It may lead to more radicalisation, but it is at least likely to marginalise Muslim women and children.

Islamic clothing is wrapped in cultural, national, religious, and gendered connotations and the effect is marginalization of women but also Muslims in general, especially non-white Muslims.

It doesn’t matter that nuns can go to the beach or that people can still wear wet suits. What matters is the racial association with Muslims devalues all who don’t fall into the narrow white definition of a “liberated woman”.

A different angle to this is that in New Zealand there have been claims that females wearing too few clothes puts them at risk of sexual assaults so they should dress more safely. Damned if they clad, damned if they don’t.

North and South magazine in its June issue covered refugees and Muslims in New Zealand, but the cover had a menacing photo subtly equating the niqab to something sinister and dangerous with the headline “Radical Islam”.

Nobody has a problem with a white woman in Wellington covering up from head to toe on a cold July morning as the wind and rain comes in from all directions.

There were many heavily clad people at the rugby test in Wellington last night, many wearing highly visible symbols of their culture.

But a Muslim woman is somehow seen as a threat to society by virtue of her modest clothing choices.

 

Leave a comment

85 Comments

  1. Iman’s onto it I reckon.

    Reply
  2. Alan Wilkinson

     /  28th August 2016

    How bizarre that an article opposing generalizations about Muslims consists of generalizations about New Zealanders.

    Your “we” is not me.

    It then makes the false claim that banning overtly religious clothing means banning (all is sneakily implied) Muslims from public places. First note that only Muslim women might be affected because of the atrociously sexist aspects of that religion. Second, that like nudists and everyone else they have the option of dressing acceptably for wherever they wish to go. Third, that only the most extremely opinionated or oppressed are likely to refuse to do so. Fourth, that there is no good case for supporting either of those.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  28th August 2016

      you must have read a different article.

      Reply
    • Joe Bloggs

       /  28th August 2016

      No good case for supporting either of those…meaning what? No good case for supporting the oppressed? Or are you trying to make a different point?

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  28th August 2016

        Pretty obvious isn’t it that normalizing overt oppression supports the oppressor not the oppressed.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  28th August 2016

          not supporting’ the extremely opinionated’…..like you…you mean!

          Reply
        • Joe Bloggs

           /  28th August 2016

          yes of course it’s obvious, but your final sentence isn’t.

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  28th August 2016

            I prefer to leave the obvious unsaid until it proves necessary. I need to leave space for PZ to fill.

            Reply
  3. Corky

     /  28th August 2016

    “Islamophobia is on the rise in the Western world and Muslims and ethnic minorities who “look Muslim” are feeling the brunt of it. New Zealand is certainly not immune.’

    I wonder why? Fair point about ignorant New Zealanders who can’t tell the difference between Muslims and Sikhs. Start with attitude.

    “There are genuine concerns in New Zealand about the potential risks from Islamic radicals, but we have to take care not to over-react to something that hasn’t happened, and we should take care not to ostracise many people in New Zealand for the actions of some on the other side of the world.”

    I’m not worried about radicals per se. I’m worried about Islam. And I can back that up with facts.

    “One of its MPs Richard Prosser suggested back in 2013, well before Brexit or Donald Trump’s presidential bid, that Muslim men should not be welcome to travel on Western airlines.”

    ‘Seems sensible when all factors are unknown. Pity parliment wasn’t as condemning of racist Muslims”

    ‘The primary effect of the burkini ban in France is not reduced terrorism or liberation of women – it is removal of Muslim women from public spaces.’

    That’s true as I’ve stated before. I personally find the burka culturally offensive. Its France and it looks as out of place as a Western women in Egypt wearing tight shorts.

    ”A different angle to this is that in New Zealand there have been claims that females wearing too few clothes puts them at risk of sexual assaults so they should dress more safely. Damned if they clad, damned if they don’t.”

    Strawman argument.

    ‘North and South magazine in its June issue covered refugees and Muslims in New Zealand, but the cover had a menacing photo subtly equating the niqab to something sinister and dangerous with the headline “Radical Islam”.

    Nobody has a problem with a white woman in Wellington covering up from head to toe on a cold July morning as the wind and rain comes in from all directions.”

    1- The article was pro Islam
    2- Not worth replying to.

    “But a Muslim woman is somehow seen as a threat to society by virtue of her modest clothing choices”.

    No, its just she doesn’t fit in with Western values. Just as women in a mosque must cover her head to fit in with Islamic mores.

    Have a look below at 2.30 and see a lying Muslim, a fuckwit lawyer and an example of why Islam is a blight on western culture. Also look at how out of place the burka looks.

    Reply
    • “its just she doesn’t fit in with Western values.”

      ‘Western values’ vary widely.

      What sort of value thinks it’s ok for nuns to wear their clothing of choice but not ok for Muslim women to wear their clothing of choice?

      Don’t Western values support freedom of expression and freedom of choice?

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  28th August 2016

        ”What sort of value thinks it’s ok for nuns to wear their clothing of choice but not ok for Muslim women to wear their clothing of choice?”

        Our values. Our way of life. Nuns are of our culture. The Christian religion was seminal in our development as a nation, for better and worse.

        ‘Don’t Western values support freedom of expression and freedom of choice.

        Yes, but not when that freedom is twisted and used against us. See above. If this was a one off incident, you would have a point. But its not a one off incident.

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  28th August 2016

          I don’t believe that one can define western values.

          In England there are still people whose values support the torture of animals like badgers for the amusement of people and justify this by saying that it has always gone on.

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  28th August 2016

            Yes, you can define western values that are common throughout the west.

            1- The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
            2- The right to practice any religion without getting bombed or kill.

            ‘In England there are still people whose values support the torture of animals like badgers for the amusement of people and justify this by saying that it has always gone on.’

            Give me a break.

            Reply
            • “The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.”

              Like at Guantanamo Bay?

            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              Military law as I understand it . Not applicable. At least they got to live. Do you know those pricks received a Koran wrapped in plastic so filthy infidel hands wouldn’t contaminate their sacred book? Some wore their teeth down loosening screws in their cells so they could be sharpened and used to kill the unbelievers. And still we let them live. And eventually we released many whom rejoined the jihad. Maybe we are nuts.

            • Blazer

               /  28th August 2016

              ‘ The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.’..this ‘right’ is long gone.You can be arrested ,interrogated and held indefinately without charge or trial these days .

            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              Why is that, Blazer?

      • A high level of trust is foundational to the smooth maintenance of society. Muslims actively erode this by having a higher authority than the state in civic matters, and by their adherence to their collective, the ummah or brotherhood of Muslims, which regards the out-group – the host society of infidels – as unworthy of trust and respect.

        Pete, as a journalist you may wish to take a disinterested perspective on this. But if in fact, as on appearances, you are not aware of factors affecting the Muslim/infidel interface, your ignorance dooms you and those you influence to the shallow oblivion of a cultural vacuum, into which the world’s greatest tradition of barbarism will flow.

        Reply
  4. Blazer

     /  28th August 2016

    no one is game enough to enlighten us on exactly what ‘western values’ are….these days!

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  28th August 2016

      Fair point. Maybe most values that aren’t Islamic.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  28th August 2016

        Islamic families believe in looking after their children ,thats one of their values.Have a go at telling us what western values are exactly.Can’t be that hard for you, if you know what they aren’t.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  28th August 2016

          Here’s a few to start on, Blazer.

          Democracy
          Human rights
          Property rights

          Amplify as required.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  28th August 2016

            not looking so much for ‘rights’ Al….’values’

            -principles or standards of behaviour; one’s judgement of what is important in life.
            “they internalize their parents’ rules and values”
            synonyms: principles, moral principles, ethics, moral code, morals, moral values, standards, moral standards, code of behaviour, rules of conduct, standards of behaviour
            “society’s values are passed on to us as children’

            Reply
            • PDB

               /  28th August 2016

              ‘Rights’ encompass our core ‘values’

              “These basic rights are based on values like dignity, fairness, equality, respect and independence” – Human rights commission.

          • Nelly Smickers

             /  28th August 2016

            @Blazer…
            ‘Islamic families believe in looking after their children,that’s one of their values….’

            Wayne was saying we don’t see too many *Christian* families kitting their kids out as Priests or Nuns – maybe Western values are just different in sooo many respects

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  28th August 2016

              Wayne will absolutely love this…real western mothers…want the best for their..kids..

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  28th August 2016

              If Western values like looking after children were universal. there’d be no child abuse. How many children are killed or injured or abused sexually and mentally by adults ? Remember Moko ?

              If Western values about property rights were universal. there’d be no fraud or theft or need for laws against these..

              There have been far fewer days without mass shootings in the US this year than there have been with these, as it’s the right of Americans to have guns.

              Democracy is what we are used to, so we think that it’s the best way. But some Western countries have been communist .Or run by dictators. Germans killed 6,000,000 people because they were Jews and only didn’t kill them all because they ran out of time-and there are people alive who survived the Holocaust and others who have somehow escaped justice for what they did in it. Germany can hardly point the finger at anyone else.

        • Blazer: “Have a go at telling us what western values are exactly.”

          Just for starters:

          Turn the other cheek. “Vengeance is mine,” sayeth the Lord. Thou shalt not bear false witness. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Love thy neighbour. When in Rome do as the Romans do. Don’t mutilate your children. Freedom of and from religion. Mercy. Democracy. Rule of law rather than a peculiar god. Individual liberty. Eschew violence. Mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. Freedom of dress, partner choice, speech and association. Women’s rights and treatment. Joy, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and making the world a better place. The Westphalian nation-state model with protected borders. Morality that changes with society, not fixed in the 7th century.

          Blazer, that you appear to have difficulty in understanding the difference between your culture of origin and that of Islam betrays a level of cultural repudiation that your education has subjected you to. This points to a deeper undermining of societal values weakening its support and preventing its defence. This is a prerequisite for cultural substitution and eventual conquest, a classic Marxist revolutionary approach.

          What are you, Blazer? Skilful adept managing others’ Weltanschauungen? Agent provocateur? Fifth columnist? Unwitting running dog? Useful idiot? Just plain stupid and ignorant?

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  29th August 2016

            a wish list of admirable but meaningless platitudes.You appear to be an archetypal yankee ‘running dog’ yourself.

            Reply
      • Blazer

         /  28th August 2016

        @Corky so called anti terrorist laws over ride the innocent till proven guilty legacy of Westminster law.

        Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  28th August 2016

      I won’t bother to look these up, I can imagine-and I’d just be revolted. Soft kiddie-porn. I wonder how many dirty old men salivate (and worse) over these images.

      (shakes Blazer’s hand as sign of solidarity over this, althought we will be fighting over something else some time, I suspect)

      Reply
  5. Blazer

     /  28th August 2016

    Reply
  6. Blazer

     /  28th August 2016

    just practicing.

    Reply
    • Nelly Smickers

       /  28th August 2016

      At least they don’t make their kids wear those damn awful Crocs :/

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  28th August 2016

        yes…western values are ‘all done…in the best…possible..taste’!

        Reply
        • Corky

           /  28th August 2016

          That’s not western values. Most people disagree with the sexualising of young girls.. Still I suppose its better than having her married off at 12 and suffering genital mutilation.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  28th August 2016

            those pics are from the U.S Corky…the leader of the Western world.We embrace american culture and values,as you know.If ‘most’ people did not condone sexualising young girls ,it would not be allowed…surely.

            Reply
            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              Its called democracy. We might disagree. But its our value system. The right to offend. No one gets their head cut off…yet!

          • Blazer

             /  28th August 2016

            So in the table below we see that in the U.S and the U.K there is great support for drone attacks, that result in the death of women and children.Are you comfortable with that?

            Reply
            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              Not really. But truthfully, it doesn’t impact on my life. And that’s the way I want it to stay. You may call me a callous bastard. But humans need an emotional attachment to care. I have none. As do Muslims for us.

          • Blazer

             /  28th August 2016

            @Corky…you can be a ‘callous bastard’…and turn a blind eye to what doesn’t impact on you,but at least just stick to that honesty, instead of trying to justify any imaginery …moral high ground.

            Reply
            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              “Instead of trying to justify any imaginery …moral high ground.”

              Please explain further?

            • Blazer

               /  28th August 2016

              @Corky…a small sample…/

              What sort of value thinks it’s ok for nuns to wear their clothing of choice but not ok for Muslim women to wear their clothing of choice?”

              ‘Our values. Our way of life. Nuns are of our culture. The Christian religion was seminal in our development as a nation, for better and worse.’

              —judgemental moral superiority!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  28th August 2016

              Came back from two years in Canada with a toddler and she pointed out the car window at a couple of nuns and said “Two Witches!”.

              Might have been right.

            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              You are just taking the piss. Start posting something of substance or start looking for another plaything.

              To answer your question without wasting my time:

              When in Rome do as the Romans do. I guess that’s because Rome is own by the Romans. Simple. If you read judgemental moral superiority into my comments then that’s your problem.

              You will know when I am making judgemental comments about western cultural superiority! Please feel free to engage me then.

            • The problem is Corky, back in Roman times it wasn’t “do as the Romans’ do”, it was “When in Rome or anywhere else in the Roman Empire, do as your Roman masters tell you to do”

              Things haven’t changed so very much … Mechanisms of compliance perhaps …?

              The masters don’t crack the real whip brutally across your back any more. They don’t need to. Instead, they crack the whip of fear in your brain via your TV, iPod or Tablet … like countless images of planes hitting the Twin Towers on 9/11 …

              The brute force of slavery has been replaced by the slavery of purchase …. we “buy the story” … That’s rapidly becoming the only Western value worth noting … Oh, sorry … No, of course, we have freedom of choice …

              “In-depth analysis of television news coverage of the September 11 attacks and their aftermath reveals how these events were fashioned into 9/11, the politically and morally charged signifier that has profoundly shaped public perception, policy and practice in the last decade.” – Brian A. Monahan, Iowa State University – https://archive.org/details/911

              And Lo, in your case, it works! They’ve got you exactly where they want you. Islam is the boogie-iman! You’ve bought the product – more prejudices – and fear once again rules the world, despite the odds of becoming a victim of Islamic terrorism in NZ being less than the odds of getting attacked by a shark … or in the U.S.A of being hit by lightning … or, no doubt, tornado or forest fire … ?

              As Alan said [or I believe “meant”] in comment #2, generalisations about New Zealanders by Mr Iman are unacceptable, whereas generalisations by New Zealanders about Muslims are, if anything, considered the norm …

              Oh to once again believe, as I did in my mispent youth, that it’s possible to blog concisely, or even long-windedly like I do, without “generalising” … Such was my ‘happy place’ …

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  28th August 2016

              @PZ, if you intended to say that I think generalizations by NZers about Muslims are the norm, you are wrong. I neither think nor implied that, and itself is a generalization about NZers.

              If you didn’t, your sentence is rather misleading.

            • Gezza

               /  29th August 2016

              Terror in Indonesia: Axe-wielding ISIS jihadi, 18, stabs Catholic priest, 60, before trying to blow up hundreds of worshippers during Sunday Mass – 28 August 2016

              http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3762288/Catholic-priest-stabbed-ISIS-knifeman-tries-kill-hundreds-setting-bomb-Indonesian-mass.html

    • PDB

       /  28th August 2016

      Blazer: “Just practising”

      Is that you? I thought from your writing that you were at least 10?

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  28th August 2016

        you display the cognitive attributes and comprehension of a 10 y.o .,so I am not surprised.Are you disappointed?

        Reply
          • Blazer

             /  28th August 2016

            get back to western values…panter

            Reply
            • PDB

               /  28th August 2016

              You are the only ‘drone’ on here Blazer……

              Drone on: Meaning – to talk for a long time in a boring way. “He was droning on (and on) about his operation”.

          • Corky

             /  28th August 2016

            Crikey, is that you,nan?

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  28th August 2016

              If enough people disagreed with children in beauity pageants being dressed as mini-whores, they wouldn’t happen. If I had a little girl, nothing would induce me to teach her to pose with her chest forward, her legs open and her mouth in a come-hither pout, emphasised by red lipstick. This is borderline (if that) sexual abuse. They are teaching little girls to look like little whores. This child has a bra top ruffled to give her the effect of breasts. How can her parents do this to her ? What next, little boys posing like body builders, with lycra shorts padded to make them look as if they had big penises ?

              These pageants are one step up from kiddie-porn. Children of that age should be protected from sexual exploitation, not given prizes for it. Western values ? Yeah, right.

            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              That’s democracy for you. The right to offend. And these pageants do offend me.

              ‘Western values ? Yeah, right.’ Nothings perfect and some of our values are skewered….like showing too much respect for Islam.’

              The trouble is you only look at the warts. Its plain to see you are a Leftie.
              Maybe these children would be better off in Iran? No, I don’t think so either.

    • From your private collection are they Blazer?

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  29th August 2016

      Can we guess what would happen to those kids in a Muslim country, Blazer?

      Tolerance vs intolerance. Which do you prefer? And why are you here?

      Reply
  7. Corky

     /  28th August 2016

    List of Islamic attacks. The last 30 days.

    https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=Last30

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  28th August 2016

      trouble with your list Corky….

      Not one of the attacks took place in a western nation.The list is mainly unstable muslim countries that have been bombed recently.A vacuum of power is created and factional infighting is the result.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  28th August 2016

        Quite true. But by there fruits they will be known. How many Muslims in the West would revert to barbarism if given the chance? How many secretly still hold those values. Well, in Britain its many:

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  28th August 2016

          I believe this is what you call….’digressive discourse’….well done.

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  28th August 2016

            No this is a factual accounted of what Muslims think by someone who has experience in this topic. No ranting Conservative here, Blazer.

            Reply
            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              * account*

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  28th August 2016

              How odd that all British Muslims think alike. Has this man spoken to every one of them ?

              It’s like saying that this is what Welsh people think.

            • Corky

               /  28th August 2016

              Well, look at the mans CV. Look at the company he hired. Then take a stab in the dark.

  8. Zedd

     /  28th August 2016

    “viva la revolucion !” 😀

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  28th August 2016

      No surrender. Look them square in the eyes.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  28th August 2016

        Where’s Arty when you need him? Probably in the saloon, drinking whiskey, with his back to the wall.

        Reply
      • Blazer

         /  28th August 2016

        You reflect a kind of ‘average’ citizen Corky,unaware and disinterested in the real drivers of power and influence but content, so long as you regard your needs are met.Digressive discourse indeed.

        Reply
        • Corky

           /  28th August 2016

          Oh, I’m well aware of many drivers, some you may not even be aware of. I just can’t be bothered dong a Parti Z. I don’t have the ability to write succinctly. Please don’t confuse simplicity with stupidity. Average citzen? No. Average blogger? Yes.

          Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s