It’s good that the “Indian-Australian” couple went ahead with their wedding despite the idiocy and discriminatory attitude of the parents. When most parents will stand by their children no matter what they do, rejecting children because they wish to enter into marriage with someone not of their own race, religion, caste or colour is disgusting.

This incident highlights the nonsense of saying that mainstream Australians are un-accepting of different cultures, when these creeps (the parents) reject their own children on cultural grounds!

It’s all very well for the author to explain to us “why” immigrants refuse to fit in with the host culture. The fact remains that they are condemning their children to the same isolation that their bigotry and culture has condemned them. People who suppress children when they are unable to make decisions for themselves are bastards, no matter what their culture.

A pleasure to read and ponder, but the article is a bit of a truism with abstract nouns like "cultural shield" and "moral purity" - let people so experienced with the social circles of such religious communities become pragmatic and constructive.

But how to integrate our morals without sounding cheesy?

I am all for the respecting of other cultures and wishes, be that conservative or liberal. What erks me, and gets my blood boiling is when these cultural beliefs tramp over the basic human rights each of us have. Culture and religion have taught us to live in a civilized manner as humans, and should be praised in that manner. However, when they are used in such a way as mentioned in the article, it is not culture/religion, it is basic human malice, and should not be guised as "culture" beliefs.

I wonder if Muslims will be able to get lighter sentences for rape because along with another minority group in Australia it is part of their 'culture' to see their young women as fair game. Mind you at the rate we murder our unborn as part of our 'culture' its a bit hard to point the finger.

Tanveer,

You say: "For Muslims, honour, shame, and the obsession with saving face are paradigms at the core of their identities"

If this is so, why do they not protest against those 'immoderate' Muslims they claim to be giving them a bad name lately? Indeed, why do they appologise for everything they do?

Or is it not possible for them to be shamed in the face of nonbelievers?

Whilst this does not imply that moderate Muslims agree with these extremists, it certainly points to a defensiveness implicit of a general "herd instinct", i.e. some form of xeno-fear, like racism, for why else would one tend always to feel that their ethnic or religious identity in general, i.e. their 'tribal' group in general, is under attack when only a sub-group is, indeed, the very sub-group these moderates claim to be giving them a bad name in the press?

The media can't be blamed for your bad press, who would only jump at the opportunity to flood the media with the views of any moderate protest group who was attempting to distance themselves from the radicals.

An excellent article, thank you Tanveer. Australia has a highly individualist culture, whereas many Islamic migrants come from collectivist cultures. Have a look here for a ranking http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-hofstede-cultural-dimensions/individualism/ which shows Australia as the 2nd most individualistic culture in the world (guess who came first?). Geert Hofstede's work identifies 5 dimensions for social interaction. You might not agree, but this is a very thought-provoking analysis.

It seems that Islamic migrants (and some of the posters in this forum) are suffering from culture shock. On almost every social measure, Australia is diametrically opposite their home countries. Add in lack of English, limited education and religious differences and you will see some extent of the problem.

There is also the fact that Australia is a guilt culture, where many of these people come from a shame culture http://www.doceo.co.uk/background/shame_guilt.htm