Something needs to be done beyond removing the sexually objectifying poll of female Asatizahs (religious teachers). The poll itself was a ranking of women in relation to a sex act too vile for me to reproduce here.
More importantly, here are some suggestions for accountability:
- Creators of the group/poll must face the fullest extent of the law, where applicable. Any calls to cover-up someone’s sin is not applicable here – that would be unjust.
- Whether the culprits are Uni students or have bright futures ahead are no excuse (if that’s who the culprits turn out to be). They are adults, plain and simple. One’s potential for “success” in the future cannot possibly absolve one of present sins. The future is a thought, the present a done deal.
There’s something deeply discriminatory in such a stance as well. You don’t hear such excuses when the culprit is an ITE student, for example, or is not openly religious. - If they turn out to be religious scholars in training or currently an Ustaz, then it is doubly noxious an act. At the bare minimum, they should be disqualified from ARS certification, even if it turns out that they cannot be legally prosecuted. Our ethical standards should be higher than the social baseline dictated by legislation.
Practically too, we cannot possibly allow men who do the opposite of “lower their gaze” to be in positions of religious authority. That would be enabling potential predators and the cycle continues. It would also signal that one can get away with such acts. In fact, given the respect and informal authority Asatizah accrue by virtue of their vocation, all the more we should censure them from such positions.
The relevant authorities ought to do a systemic review of their systems and processes.
Some areas to look at
(A) Comprehensive sex education, that combines practical scientific knowledge with an ethical understanding of the issues. This cannot happen in silo. There ought to be a wider effort surrounding gender within our religious education, I feel. We have the social capacity for, as shown by Hijab issue just a while back. (Side note: men who were so loud about the hijab, you’d better be louder wrt this issue.) We have the organisational capacity too, as amply shown in our response over the years to muslim extremism. This is a serious enough issue, methinks.
As Madam President said on FB: “This is not just the worst kind of harassment that’s against our law but amounts to an open invitation to commit sexual violence against women”.
This incident speaks of a deeper issue, something must be done.
(B ) A Care Unit that caters specifically to victims of such abuses. This unit cannot just take a “pray and ask Allah” approach. If someone gets into a car accident, we don’t ask the poor fella to just pray and heal the broken bones right?
Likewise, given the religious tenor/context of abuses like this latest one, a victim-centred approach to healing and recovery should also include religious and spiritual content. That said, a victim-centred approach also means that should the victim desire a non-religious/a-religious approach, such an option must be available too. And to choose such an option is not against God or somehow anti-Islamic. Sometimes, distance is good, even necessary, for one’s faith. Bottom-line: it’s all about the victim – not someone’s idea of a crisis of faith.
So fill the Care Unit with legitimate experts, not with people who took a two week course in counselling. Be unafraid to learn from the best of other communities – religious, secular, what have you.
(C) Take a serious look at how sexual abuse reporting is done and addressed within our Malay and Muslim Organisations (MMO). Maybe even create an ombudsman, to review and standardise best case practices across all MMOs, of how victims are taken care of to heal and become survivors of sexual harassment.
(D) Review how well women are represented, through leadership roles or otherwise, within MMOs. How often do female Asatizah get a seat at the table? I am sure that would make a difference.
Background and context
There was a poll going around of female Asatizah. The one-liner question used in the poll is too graphic in its context for me to reproduce here. Suffice to say, the women were ranked and over 1,000 people voted before it disappeared. Apparently, this is not a new issue. Make no bones about it, this too is a form of sexual harassment.
It’s deeply troubling for many more reasons, at the heart of which is the gross and utter disrespect for women.
Hence, a total and limited focus on just the fact that they are Ustazahs is problematic. The dignity of a woman does not rest on her “achievement” or “status” as a religious figure but is innate, god-given, inviolable, regardless of her status. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Which is why I feel MP Rahayu Mazam’s choice of pictures in her FB post on this issue is an important one. Her chosen pictures depict women, of different backgrounds and races, with and without the hijab.
In her own words: “I feel that all our efforts to encourage women’s development will be meaningless if the society still disrespects women and still perceives women as the weaker gender or as sexual objects.”
Madam President Halimah Yacob has also spoken up and is rightfully upset about this poll. She said: “Is there no limit to how low some will stoop to degrade and defile women? Not only those who conducted the poll but those who participated in it also deserves our strongest condemnation…”
Notably, Madam President also said this: “If indeed it’s true that some are students studying the religion (of which I stand corrected), then we have to seriously consider whether they are fit to preach in the community once they complete their studies.”
As such, the direction of our outrage should be towards the perpetrators. Doubly so if they turn out to be Asatizah or asatizah-in-training.
Which brings us to the issue of accountability above. There is much more to be said, but this post is getting too long.
So i’ll just end with this:
“We are oft to blame in this, -’tis too much proved, – that with devotion’s visage, and pious action we do sugar o’er the devil himself.”