|
|
What should be done to put an end to such case
On 11th of
December, in Mississauga, Canada, Aqsa, a 16 year old Canadian girl was choked
to death by her Pakistani father, Muhammad Parvez, for not wearing hijab. “She
wanted to live her life the way she wanted to, not the way her parents wanted
her to,” her classmates told the reporters. “She just wanted to be herself,
honestly she just wanted to show her beauty, and not be pushed around by her
parents telling her what she has to be like, what she has to do. Nobody would
want to do that.”
Yes, nobody would want to do that, but sadly many girls born in Islamic families
are forced to do that.
One day after the death of Aqsa, I received an email from an 18 year old girl
from UK. She said that she has been reading about Islam and she has decided not
to follow that religion. However, her Muslim parents force her to wear hijab and
her sister told her that if their mother learns about her views, “she would
either kill you or she’ll kill herself”.
I sent her the story of Aqsa and what her father did to her. She wrote back and
said, “What an animal! Anyways, I don’t think my mom cares about my beliefs, as
long as I don’t have a boy friend, [and don’t] take off my hijaab.”
The truth is that Aqsa’s father was not an animal either. He was just a devout
Muslim, who had worked hard and had built a nice home for his family in an
upscale neighborhood. He was an ideal immigrant, a true “success story.”
However, he had no choice. He did what he had to do. As one friend wrote, “In a
way there are two victims in this case. This man like any other father must have
loved, nurtured and cared for his daughter for years. It is so unfortunate that
he finds himself turned into a monster that ate his own progeny.” Then this
friend asked “What kind of ideology was it that turned a simple hard working
family man into a revolting image of himself?”
What the westerners do not understand is that Muslims have different values,
which are diametrically in contrast with western values. Western societies are
guilt based. In guilt based societies individuals base their conduct on “right”
and “wrong”. They try to do the right thing and if they do something wrong, they
feel guilty. Muslim societies are shame based. In shame based societies
individuals base their conduct on the opinion of others about them. What really
counts is to look good. In shame cultures, if you do something wrong, as long as
no one sees it and knows about it, you are okay. You can still keep your head
high and act as an honorable member of the society. It is the image that you
project of yourself that matters. You must do everything to protect that image.
It is all about keeping the appearances.
In guilt societies, how you dress or don’t dress is your business. You can
practice nudity and even promiscuity and have no shame. As long as you don’t
violate someone else’s rights you can do whatever you like. Such a thing is
inconceivable for Muslims who come from shame societies and where everybody's
life is the business of everybody else. This makes the western and Islamic
cultures essentially incompatible. If this problem is not resolved soon, it will
result is a major clash and dire consequences.
In a subsequent email my young British friend wrote, “My mom has noticed a
change in me, ..and she said today, ‘I hope you haven’t done anything because so
an so aunt will laugh.' Jesus! Who cares about so and so aunt who doesn’t even
care about us?”
This is the crux of the problem. In Islamic societies people live in function of
the opinion of others about them. That is the only thing that really matters to
them. Muhammad Parvez was devastated by the fact that her 16 year old daughter
wanted to dress like her classmates and show off her beauty. How could he look
into the eyes of his Muslim friends with such a daughter? Muslims call western
women “sluts” for not covering themselves. For Mr. Parvez his daughter’s western
clothing was a major source of shame and dishonor. He had no choice but to kill
her. There is hardly anything for which we humans are willing to die for like
our honor. This is far truer in shame based societies, where guilt plays
virtually no role and everything is based on shame and honor.
Millions of girls living in Muslim families in the west are abused, beaten and
face death by their own loved ones because of honor. Don’t assume that these
girls are the only victims. Their families are also victims. They are left with
no choice, but to kill the apple of their own eyes. Everyone in this tragedy is
a victim. It’s the government that is guilty!
The government is guilty for letting down its Muslim citizens and particularly
its most vulnerable members. There was no need for Aqsa to die. If hijab is
banned, no Muslim can look down at other Muslims for not observing it and no one
will have to feel shame. Muslims hardy wear hijab or observe any Islamic custom
when they live in places where there are few Muslims. This problem arises only
when they congregate together and build their shame based communities.
The 20th century Pahlavi ruler Reza Shah knew how to handle this problem. He
banned the chador (Iranian style of veil) in 1936. He ordered the police to
arrest woman wearing chador and forcibly remove it. Although this policy
outraged the mullahs, the average Iranians were relieved. The ban allowed them
to be free without having to deal with the burden of shame. The historian
Mir-Hosseini writes, “this move was welcomed by Westernized and upperclass men
and women, who saw it in liberal terms as a first step in granting women their
rights." She continues, 'between 1941 and 1979 wearing hejab [hijab] was no
longer an offence, but it was a real hindrance to climbing the social ladder, a
badge of backwardness and a marker of class. A headscarf, let alone the chador,
prejudiced the chances of advancement in work and society not only of working
women but also of men, who were increasingly expected to appear with their wives
at social functions. Fashionable hotels and restaurants refused to admit women
with chador, schools and universities actively discouraged the chador, although
the headscarf was tolerated. It was common to see girls from traditional
families, who had to leave home with the chador, arriving at school without it
and then putting it on again on the way home'." (cited in El-Guindi 1999 pp.
174-175)
Despite his flaws, Reza Shah is hailed as a hero and the father of modern Persia
by many Iranians because he banned the hijab. He was a Muslim and was keenly
aware of the Muslim mind. He knew that only with the fist of the law Muslims can
be rescued from their backward traditions. He broke down the power and prestige
of the clergy, discarded the Islamic law, closed down Islamic madrassahs,
forbade religious processions, and replaced the Islamic calendar with the old
Persian-Zoroastrian solar calendar. He prohibited the Islamic call to prayer and
discouraged the pilgrimage to Mecca. He even forced the clergy to shave and take
off their robe and engage in honorable professions. The majority of Iranians
welcomed his reforms. He was seen as a liberator. He set Iran free from the
oppression of the culture of shame. It is this shame that inhibits Muslims to
take the first step and stand out of the crowd.
Western governments have a duty towards their Muslim citizens and particularly
their women that traditionally have been the most disadvantaged members of
Islamic societies. If hijab was banned in Canada Aqsa would be alive today and a
hard working good father would not have had to become the murderer of his own
beloved daughter. The government failed both Aqsa and her father.
There are millions Muslim families who share Parvez’s predicament in western
countries. The girls in these families are under greater pressure and bigger
danger than those living in Islamic countries. In Islamic countries everyone
wears the same clothing. It is much easier for Muslim girls to conform and
comply there than in western countries. It is here that they need to be
protected.
Aqsa is dead. Her beauty will be devoured by a cold grave. That bud was nipped
before blossoming into a full flower. Will we let her death go in vain or will
we ban hijab and set millions of Muslims free in her memory?
We must ban hijab, save innocent lives, end this abuse, and absolve the poor
Muslim parents from their unbearable burden. Muslim parents are not animals.
They are torn apart between their love of their children and their honor. Only
the government can take that burden away. The only people who would not welcome
this ban will be the mullahs who will see their power reduced. The average
Muslims will be grateful and relieved from the oppression of their peers’
scornful eyes.
Now that Muslims are living in the west in such a large numbers, politicians
must make an extra effort to understand the Muslim mind. Only the hand of law
can put an end to this culture of shame and force Muslims to integrate. If we
let this division stand, a clash between these two cultures will become
inevitable.
Posted by pl read @ 12/19/2007 7:32 AM
http://o3.indiatimes.com/mytimes/archive/2007/12/18/4843255.aspx
|
