How sharia apologists fuel Pauline Hanson’s grievance
Hanson, who donned a burka in the chamber to protest the rejection of her bill in support of a burka ban, is but one of a number of individuals, including many women from Muslim backgrounds, who are offended by the notion that women should cover themselves in black cloth in order to be seen as “modest” and “pure”. Surely it is the job of those who believe in women’s freedom, equality, and dignity to speak out against Islamism – which is not the same thing as being anti-Muslim.
The more unequal the rights of women in comparison with those of men, the worse the domestic violence (and other forms of abuse) inflicted on women at the hands of men becomes. Women and girls living under Muslim law in the UK, Australia, and elsewhere, are particularly vulnerable to domestic violence.
Forced and early marriage, polygamy and draconian attitudes towards the role of women in the home mean that wives have little or no power, while husbands exercise theirs any way they choose. In addition, the widespread practice of using patriarchal sharia courts to settle disputes between family members has resulted in a free-for-all within conservative Muslim households.
It is estimated that there are currently around 85 sharia councils operating in Britain. They enjoy the support of a number of non-Muslim establishment figures, including former Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who once said in an interview: “There’s a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law, as we already do with some other aspects of religious law.”
It seems incredible that after many decades of feminism in the West, so many on the left are willing to sacrifice women’s rights in the name of so-called religious freedom – especially the rights of Muslim-born women.
Speaking out against sharia law in the UK is often viewed as racist. Since publishing my first article about Pakistani grooming gangs in the north of England in 2007, I have been listed on the website Islamophobia Watch – despite having made it clear the men were committing such crimes partly because they knew the authorities would probably turn a blind eye.
I am tired of hearing from so-called Western feminists that criticism of the myriad ways in which Muslim men oppress Muslim women and girls is tantamount to Western imperialism. Feminists (many of them of Muslim heritage) who oppose those aspects of Islam that have institutionalised and normalised gender apartheid also oppose sexism within Christianity and Judaism.
It would be inconsistent and hypocritical if defenders of human rights and gender equality were not to expose and condemn the misogyny within Islam, yet many on the left defend grotesque and misogynistic practices and beliefs within Islam for fear of being accused of racism or Islamophobia.
In 2011, a former president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Ikebal Patel, suggested, in a journal article, that Australia “compromise with Islam” and allow sharia courts to rule on certain civil matters, citing the British response to sharia law as a positive approach.
Polygamy is illegal in Australia, yet there is official tolerance of Muslim men who arrive with multiple wives. Not all Muslims living in Australia have registered their marriages, preferring to rely on religious ceremonies – even though this is outlawed under the Marriage Act. Under the disingenuous guise of helping Muslim women, it has been suggested that sharia law be given priority over Australian divorce law. This plan, if enacted, would prevent Muslims from obtaining a civil divorce unless they have first divorced under Islamic law.
In response to Patel, legal academics Ann Black and Kerrie Sadiq wrote in the University of NSW Law Journal that sharia law had already become a “shadow legal system” in Australia, endorsing polygamous and under-age marriages – both outlawed under the Marriage Act. It will not stop there. Thirty years ago it would have been unthinkable for sharia to be seen by democratic nations as anything other than barbaric.
I don’t support Hanson’s policies or her party, and am on the liberal side when it comes to immigration and asylum. But anyone supporting Islamists, or a parallel sharia legal system, is no friend of a democratic society. What the left has to understand is that its acquiescence to radical Islam is not only hypocrisy, but also extremely helpful to the far right.
More Coverage
Behind the scenes of the surprise retail spending rush
The leftists and cultural relativists roundly condemning Pauline Hanson over her support for a ban on the burka in public would be well advised to consider how people like themselves have handed her this opportunity on a plate.