At the risk of sounding conceited, I am an extremely good looking women (in that I am of european heritage and have a shape that is uncommon to these parts of the world i.e unlike most australian born women I know, I actually have breasts!). I am approached regularily by men, and I know some men who I do not believe could actually help themselves if I showed too much of myself to them. I have developed a thick skin over the years and will rarely report sexual harrasment, even though in the strictest sense of the term, I experience this often. The test I use to asses wether I have been disadvantaged by the harasment I experience is to look at my career prospects, how far I have come financially considering the amount of years I have been working in my field and, how I compare to those women around me who, well how do I put this nicely, have no body shape. If I use this measure of justice, in relation to a life time and in relation to my social/economic context, I cant really say that I am worse off. I probably have less money in my pocket at the end of each fortnight, than I should do if I was to be viewed as more than just a sex object to potential employers, work collegues etc. And I do long for the day that my writing is actually taken seriously, as measured by publications rather than by income generation. But gee I have a good time! I have great sex and so many women I know do not. I have a roof over my head that is fairly secure. And so many women I know, who do not recieve the same level of sexual attension , do not. What can I say? I like it, mostly...

C'Mon Bronwyn,

Your comments:

"It is, worryingly, still part of the “norm” in the collective Australian psyche to consider women as sexual predators of unwitting men who simply can't help themselves "

I hope i have read wrong, but this is total crap.

What do you base this claim on? The shiek's comments where bad, but when people like you start bagging the rest of us men and making totally false claims, you should take a good hard look at yourself, your above statement is offensive.

You are not a man, so how do you know what is part of our collective psyche? people like you need to keep the neanderthal image of men to keep furthering your own causes.

I hope you are hoping to get a bite out of this, because you will get one i am sure

When the confected outrage over Hilali's idiotic statement first hit the news, I happened to be having a beer in a country pub, where the story appeared on the TV in the public bar. I was surprised when, instead of the usual Islamophobic reaction to any story about a Muslim, the apparent consensus among the other blokes at the bar was that Hilali's pronouncement was essentially correct - but it could have been expressed better.

From a completely different direction, some of the most prolific Christian contributors to this forum often express sentiments concerning modesty and sexuality that differ from Hilali's only by degree, i.e. that women and girls who dress 'provocatively' are inviting sexual attention from men, who can't help being tempted by the mere sight of naked female flesh.

I think Bronwyn's quite correct to assert that Hilali's comments are congruent with certain values held by significant sectors (i.e. conservative men, fundamentalist Christians) of Australian society. Of course, this raises the question as to why they inspired such apparent outrage in the mass media.

Maybe I'm just naive at my age, but I believe its more than the clothes that invite the lust at times. its the attitude one portrays of oneself that overpowers the clothes, which can give out mixed and unintentional messages.
I find it hard to believe that men can act on such primitive instinctiveness as one based on materialistic clothes. In fact, i believe in our modern society men are probably so used to seeing woman scantily clad that it doesnt really make a difference to them either way. Perhaps in societies where woman are more covered up, this scantility would be seen as scandelous and "inviting".

The Author said:

"Such use of women and girl children in advertising reinforces the message that women and girls are indeed “Satan's agents”, constantly both available and elusive sexual objects, designed to goad men into sexual fantasy that they then have difficulty in not acting out."

Satans agents ? err.. hardly.. speaking as a conservative evangelical, its simply 'life'.. females attract males and vice versa.
And there sadly those in the community who simply want to financially capitalize on that fact by homing in on our weakest life zone.

I think due to hard wiring, males are more easily aroused by females, but lets not take this to mean they /we are about to pounce on and molest the first skimpily clad female we see. Arousal, attraction, are one thing. 'Unwelcome action' is entirely another.
Sometimes a 'fashion' message is selective in intent, but 'general' in the perception of others.

The important thing is our socialization. What do we 'pass on' to our young males regarding females ?
Well.. in this day and age, precious little, many young males get most of their views of women from the hip hop videos, writhing girls, pushing their butts out in submissive welcome to scantily clad well toned worked out male bodies.

The message I want to communicate to my sons is:"Always look past the exterior, to the true beauty beneath, and the whole person".
One of my sons has had quite a few experiences with females. He has scored some who are incredibly HOT....but seems to have latched on now to one who he feels so totally connected to at the inner level. She is skinny, has no hips, a funny nose, is not even attractive physically, is older than him and has children by a previous marraige.. I jusssst dont' get it. But one thing I do get, he has found fulfillment in the whole person at a deeper level than the shallow skin deep persuasion of MTV and Rap video's and definitely the sexed up ads the author refers to.

Oh well its Melbourne cup day and I have the day off.

What a touchy topic this is.

There is much confusion and emotional rethoric in dealing with the subject of sex.

What the writer failed to mention is that 0.3% of person aged 18 and over were victims of at least one sexual assault.

Sexual assault was defined as an incident of a sexual nature involving physical contact, indecent assault, attempted rape, rape and assault with the intent to sexually assault.

Much remains confused and hidden about sexual behaviour and a small highly vocal emotive group control the debate.

Mufti's metaphor shows the huge gulf that exists in what is known as values conflict. Other people added their own meaning to what he said and it is this added meaning is fueling the hysterical debate.

Much of the mating behaviour is covert (hidden)and despite the best efforts of men, not a single one of them has managed to read whats on a woman's mind and as such because the vast majority of sexual behaviour is covert and men cant read minds.

Something is seriously wrong when a small minority are telling the majority that they are wrong.

Until we become open and honest about our motives, confusion, misunderstanding, mix messages will reign surpreme.

Crikey, better duck, the feminists are after Leunig now.
Er, did someone say 'duck'?

Aw, c'mon, leave Leunig alone. Time for a little poem by Leunig:

"They took him on a stretcher to the Home for the Appalled where he lay down in a corner and he bawled and bawled and bawled.

'There's nothing wrong with me,' he wailed, when asked about his bawling, 'It's the world that need attention; It's so utterly appalling.'

'It's so utterly appalling,' he sobbed and cried and bawled, and the chorus rose to join him at the Home for the Appalled."

Thanks Leunig, your whimsical humour has helped many keep a toehold on sanity, while the sirens* wail outside.

Talking about sirens wailing outside, I read in Dr Bronwyn Winter's bio that she is 'a senior lecturer at the University of Sydney, School of Languages and Cultures(?), Deptartment of French Studies. She is also active in the feminist and lesbian/gay movements.' But that in itself doesn't go far enough to explain her lack of a sense of humour.

Please Mr Howard, what about some family studies and masculinity courses at Australian universities?

*Note: Dear reader, I hasten to add that the 'sirens' referred to are not the enticing, girly ones.

The author wrote: "...Hilali's words, while extreme, and undeniably offensive to both women and men, sit well within the parameters of a certain "Australian value"..."

Bronwyn,

Your reasoning is fundamentally frauded because it revolves within a narrow framework. (But precisely so, your sentiment is understandable.)

Even if some "Australian value" denigrate women as much as Islamic culture, this cannot justify the Hilali's words and attitudes because Islamic values are 'unnatural' values decreed as part of a frauded religion. Islamic culture is fixed in time, undemocratic and anti-freedom.

"Australian attitudes" embody natural human behaviour, good and bad. We adhere to democratic ideals when dealing with unacceptable behaviours.

Therefore, even if some "Australian values" denigrate women MORE THAN Islamic culture, to reject teachings of Hilali on women is part and parcel of rejecting Islamic culture as being Australian.

We can (and we should) stake our ground, telling Muslims to go elsewhere to practise their value system because Islam is anti-democracy, anti-freedom. The issue on women is but one of many reasons to expell Hilali and reject Islamisation.

It is how Australians want this country to be. It is no double-standard in my argument.

I would of thought women who dress immodedtly want to be looked at. Why else would they want to flash what they have and have not got. You will never be able to legislate against what is natural. If you don't want to be looked at women then take God's advice and dress modestly. If you ignore the simple fact that men are turned on by sight don't complain when people look at the parts you are flashing

Winter is right and you all know it. Christianity and Islam are both defined by their hatred of women. Paranoid superstition looks for scapegoats and who is a better scape goat than somebody that can be psychologically broken, belittled, beaten and abused and not affect the war effort of filling up heaven or paradise but women.
Sick minded men see women as sex objects real men don’t. It is that simple. Dress is only fashion, if anybody thinks it is a sign of satan or a symbol to justify harassment then stick that man in a padded cell where he cant harm himself or others. As for what Church preaches Winter is right and her detractors are wrong. Clergy are only con-men, theologians, charlatans, confidence tricksters; there is something wrong with people who believe those self claimed gods anyway we should be focussing on their mental health which is the cause of the problem. Misogyny is a sickness.
The fact that Christian communities experience an extremely high level of child sex and psychological abuse really pin points where these peoples heads are at. Superstition based misogyny is only a small part of the problem but I agree a major threat to civilised people.
This is the perspective of a real man.

o.k lets get one more thing straight. My best australian born friend (with what I term as no body shape) can wear exactly the same clothes as I do and never be accused of "dressing imodestly". I have a body shape that attracts attension! It does not matter what I wear! I attract attension.

Gee vivy I wish I had that amount of power!

Atention from females not men ;).

But sadly this is not the way the world works.

Boy it must be great to be able to sit back and chose and not to have to worry about rejection or being accused of sexual harrasement etc.

Basically I have given up on your gender because it is just too hard, being dammed if you do and dammed if you dont.

West,

U wrote: "Christianity and Islam are both defined by their hatred of women..." ??

Whilst I agree with your anti-misogyny position, you made various wild sweeping statements one almost have to assume you have reasons to say the things you did.

My understanding is Christianity is about God's love, Islam is about submission. (You probably know what I think about Islam). Is my head completely in the sand?

Don't just mention statistics of sex abuse cases involving Christians. It may only be as meaningful as that Iranian Muslim claiming Iran is morally superior than western nations because it has very few rape cases.

Do you know any Christian who is taught to hate women, WHO IS PREPARED TO DEBATE ONLINE HERE?

I'd be most interested to find out if there is a Christianity that I know nothing about.

Thanks, Bronwyn, for a thoughtful piece. Any bloke who is serious about combatting violence against women should get involved in the White Ribbon Day campaign!!

http://www.whiteribbonday.org.au/

vivy said: "At the risk of sounding conceited, I am an extremely good looking women (in that I am of european heritage and have a shape that is uncommon to these parts of the world i.e unlike most australian born women I know, I actually have breasts!)"

ROFLMFAO!

vivy also said: "I have a body shape that attracts attension! (sic)"

That won't do you much good here.. :D

Irfan said: "Any bloke who is serious about combatting violence against women should get involved in the White Ribbon Day campaign!!"

What's all this White Ribbon Day crap? How about a Day dedicated to stopping violence against men as well as women? Wouldn't that in itself be an act of solidarity between the two sexes? And besides that, my understanding is that men are more frequently the victims of physical violence anyway..

Vivy
Your absolutely correct. I'm 6'2" and 240lbs., I'm not muscle bound nor am I fat. I get the looks and I get comments when I'm at the beach but, it seems to me they're commenting, men and women, more frequently when I'm dressed up in a nice suit.
I'm sorry folks, you can call me any bad name that comes to mind but, if you think I'm going backwards into the dark age of social development just to empower some socially retarded religion and it's blind followers, forget it. If you truly want to know what motivates rape don't play with numbers. Look into the peoples lives as a whole.

Us blokes can and do have problems, some caused by us and some by females. Often us men cannot help ourselves - not talking rape by the way. In PNG I lived at out-stations , at one the women from the maternity clinic used to splash in the ocean yards from me. They usually wore just a small, very small, lap-lap, they became in a short time just a part of the scenery. It was the same for the many many topless females in the local villages. I recal once coming into town, Madang, I went into a store where I was served by a young very attractive, well dressed and utterly charming indigenous lady. This lady bent over to get something and I found myself as if guided by instinct peering down the front of her dress. I was somewhat embarrassed at my actions or my perving, maybe her breasts were hidden which made me do what I did. Or maybe it was my male hormones these hormones do take over us unfortunate males at the wrong time and cause us to appear a little unbalanced perhaps. I do not know what the above proves - if anything. Regards, numbat
PS I have other stories about the same subject from my time in PNG but at present I will just threaten you with them.

LOOKOUT!

Step back fella's. There's a "real man" here and he's not taking any prisoners by the sounds of it. If it weren't for the fact that I'm laughing so much, I guess I should be quaking in my boots.

Dear, dear, dear, dear, dear. Where do they come from?

Mr West, you may be a real man in your own lunch-time, or when you're slumming around the women's studies campus, or in the shower, or in your own dreams, but I don't think you're going to get a lot of support here.

I'm really lost for words.

I'm still cracking up with laughter. I'll try writing again later when I've composed myself. This is all so brilliant. And vivy, any chance of getting your phone number. Once I was VERY involved with a beautiful Sicilian girl and I know EXACTLY what you're talking about. And I know the way of you're thinking too. And it's certainly not the same way that Mr West thinks.

Anyway, good luck to all of you. You can't help but see the humour of it all.

Viva la difference!

It is sad I think, that there is still so much misunderstanding between the genders and people seem to be very rigid in their opinions.

I am sure that dressing a certain way entices (or repels) certain types of men (or women for that matter). Whether we like it or not, certain messages are sent from our appearance and behaviour. While I consider theoretically in a free society, people should be able to express themselves as they wish without harassment, in practice this is not the case.

Take for example the clothes worn by young men: baggy jeans, sweatshirts with hoods etc. Young men will tell you that they, rather than men dressed in suits, get unwanted attention from the police. And some women feel the need to attract any sort of attention which makes it very hard on the rest of us who just want to treated as people. Unfortunately in this day and age of "image" people cannot, and do not want to, see beneath the surface.

The author asserts that: "Taken within this context, Hilali's words,.... sit well within the parameters of a certain “Australian value” according to which women are responsible for men's aberrant behaviour, even when they are its victims."

and

"It is.... still part of the “norm” in the collective Australian psyche to consider women as sexual predators of unwitting men who simply can't help themselves"

The author should be aware that the Australian community does not agree with her assertions and for many years Courts have not been able to take into account such things as the previous sexual history of the alleged victim, provocative dress or whatever that were previously seen as possible contributory factors.

Why pretend that these antiquated views hold sway (as the 'norm') when there is practical evidence to the contrary? This gives readers an entirely wrong view of Australian culture.

Even though we pass laws there will still be the small percentage of perpetrators who break them. However when apprehended as they almost certainly will be, they will be dealt with most severely by the Courts.

The Australian public is strong in its resolve that all sexual crimes should attract strong sentences and Australians' abhorrence of sexual crimes and violence is not diminished by the utterances of the Sheik. Australians are not soft on sexual predators and will never accept the Sheik's rationalisations. The recent outcry against the Sheik is proof of that.

So how could it be (as the author asserts) "the “norm”" in Australia "to consider women as sexual predators of unwitting men who simply can't help themselves"? That is simple not true.

I think the author has lost her perspective on this issue.

I got the impression from Hilaly's speach that he was actually suggesting that men are animalistic and incapable of controlling their actions.

This implies that: men can be excused for extreme violence simply because they are can't control their actions, and that this is ok with him.

Now I know most men do not go around raping women and I think they should be very angry at the slur.

Some men, actually get turned off if a woman is being overly inviting, whereas others get titilated but don't feel the need to violate and rape. Gee whiz, imagine what chaos there would be if all men were absolutely controlled by their penises.

Men who cannot control their base urges are deviate, not the norm.

The author does a disservice by implying that it is young girl childern that get abused, young boy children get sexually assaulted too. I doubt if anyone would suggest that they dressed provocatively!

Voilence is violence, and women are capable of violence also, but there is no justification for rape.

A letter written to one of our newspapers suggested that men might not succumb to life’s carnal vices if they were shut away in their rooms wearing a suitable head covering. Perhaps a blanket would serve the purpose.

Well put aka.

I cant help but wonder at the lack of outrage (or at the least the very much more subdued response) of men to the comments of the mufti. Surely men should be outraged at the suggestion that they lack so much intelligence that they are completely subject to their instincts, rather than being capable of rational thought and reasoned action. The author of this article no doubt has used this relatively quiet reaction to draw a correlation that the views held widely by australian men cant be that different. Which, even if the correlation is not true, is a reason starting point to examine why the reaction from men was not as strong as it could have been. So has anyone got suggestions about this?

vivy, if publishers aren't taking your writing seriously, I think it might be less about your breasts and more about your ability to spell or use appropriate punctuation.

I agree with AKA - only I do not think that author implies men and boy children do not get abused. The article is specifically dealing with the attitudes of men towards women, sexuality and rape. Both Hilaly and Lunig suggest that women are responsible, if not complicit, in the sexual violence inflicted upon them. They both suggest male violent behaviour towards women is natural and their fore excusable in some way and that this particular violent behaviour is invited by women when they choose what to wear on a particular day. This entire argument is deceptive as it fails to deal with the fact that rape is about power. It is about one person getting off on the power to force another into a sexual act. Rape is not sex. It is a violent act of aggression and power. Women and girls who are victims of rape are of every shape, age, ethnicity, dress sense and class, (even babies and pensioners are victims of rape.)

One can not help but wonder if/when Hilaly and Lunig advocate their stance that implies that women are responsible, if not complicit, in the sexual violence inflicted upon them, they are perhaps exposeing themselves for being socially inadequate males with an unhealthy, but obvious, need to fantasise about holding power over women in a sexual form but are too cowardly to admit their own inadequacy and there fore blame women.

Don't know whether these comments still hold true?

What was she like, mate? asks a young feller to the other.

Oh not bad - says the other - good for a night but not for a
lifetime.

About girls trying to lose too much weight?
Well not bad, but a bugger for a cuddle.

Dewie,

Why, don't you know? Teachers have been telling kids for decades now that spelling, punctuation and grammar aren't important any more, just so long as you can get your message across. I respectfully suggest that vivy's been putting her bazookoid messages across very nicely, it would seem.

Bronwyn Winter is riding on the wave of Muslim misogynistic oppression.If you can't get attention through the normal channels of hard work and talent,just go with the power of those who oppress your own gender and attribute the same gender extremism to all levels of Australian Society.

Bronwyn Winter is really quite disgusting,she is both gutless and a traitor to all women.

I agree with Bronwyn. I have to say though, it seems that every time something bad is said about men generally, there are always some individual men ready to jump up and down, accusing women of "man hating" and feeling really offended because a woman dared say something against men's bad behaviour in general.
I don't think that Bronwyn is suggesting that every man has zero control over his impulses, only that it is a widely held belief that this is the case. A belief held by many men and some women. Why don't the men who are offended by Bronwyns comments direct their anger instead, at the multitudes of men who do behave this way, who do have this attitude. Can't you see that the degradation, sexualisation of women, the sexual harrassment, the rapes, is a problem within your gender group? Why won't you speak out against this? Rebuke the men who are doing this for goodness sake!! This isn't about "man hating" this is about care and compassion for women, women who are being sexually assaulted, harrassed and humiliated in the media through advertising etc. Women who are then too afraid to speak out about their assaults because they aren't taken seriously. Don't expect us women to put up with this, some of us will speak out, no, many more of us will speak out and if some men get offended,get over yourself, you aren't the ones being hurt here. Great article Bronwyn, keep it coming.

Vivy "I am an extremely good looking women", how many of you are there? Did you clone yourself? I've read one of your comments before. Don't think you really like Aussie men...or Aussie women. Why don't you go back to your cesspit country of origin, where the men and women are obviously much better (yeah, right!). You really are obnoxious!

Although at face value the Shiek Hilalis words appear to be about sex it is really about politics. The politics of the Muslim women in this country wearing the muslim religious uniform as apposed to Australian women not wearing them. If he can portray one as right and the other as wrong then he can gain more support among his followers for the continued wearing of this getup in Western countries.

The battle in all countries rages around the wearing of the Muslim headgear and robes as a symbol of Muslim defiance to fit into their adopted countries. He also seeks to frighten muslim women into wearing these robes in case they may be influnenced by their host culture to take them off. If rape and incest were truly reported in some of these Muslim countries and obviously the women aren’t going to report it if they are going to be blamed , the incidence of it would be fairly high I suspect. In less sexually explicit times in the west the reporting of rape also did not happen.

No Shiek Hilali Muslim women are not more pure and better than Australian women . The wearing of a disguise does not make a kinder or nicer person than some one who doesn’t wear a disguise.

And a lot of Muslim women are guilty of branding Australian women this way to make
themselves fell more holy and superior to Australian women so they can justify their Muslim tribalism.

Elka
I guess men are also responsible for what is expressed in womens and teen magazines. For the number of cases of bulimia and anorexia. For womans fashion. Gee I guess men are responsible for women period. Now I understand the feminazi and the emasculation of society today. Poor women, they're not contributers of society but rather suffering a form of Stockholm syndrome. They're only participating out of fear and a system of forced compliance. No wonder there are no real women any more, just social victims. No men of value, just walking billfolds.
All those who strive for victim status ought to go about in a black sheet, covered from head to toe, so the rest of us can stay out of harms way.

Aqvarivs

There is nothing wrong with womens magazines or teen magazines or womens fashion.
There is nothing wrong with the celebration of the power of female sexuality. Men aren’t forced to suppress their sexuality why should women be forced to suppress theirs.

Its wonderful to see women excel in sport and sing and dance on stage. Women in black robes aren’t allowed to express themselves like this. I love to see Rhonda Birchmore on the stage in Melbourne singing and dancing up a storm in her wonderful stage dresses.

Women who fear this kind of thing should ask themselves why they fear their own sexuality.

Bulimia and anorexia is a compulsive illness, its about a feeling of lack of control in your life. These people latch on to food because its one thing they can have control over when everything else in their lives seems to be spiraling out of control I really don’t think it is about female sexuality.

You are right about women trying to emasculate men in Western society though. That’s because the sexes don’t understand the way the other thinks and its an age old conflict that women want men to be more understanding of women, and men want women to be more understanding of men. I say let men be men and let women be women as long as they respect each other and do no harm.

I thought the essay was quite well crafted, reflective and intelligent.

Like Numbat, it reminded me of my times in PNG.

On one occasion I sat under a coconut palm with a local villager friend.

"You know", he observed. Back in the days when our women wore nothing at all, our menfolk hardly looked at them. Now that our women wear meri blouses (the common missionary garment that covers up women from neck to knees) we get turned on by just a glimpse of a bare shoulder."

In support of his observation, there is more sexual abuse in PNG nowadays, subsequent to missionary insistence of clothing prudery, than there was in the pre-missionary days. By far.

I hasted to add that, as a bloke, I am not clamouring for women to be less clad. Just pointing out that the amount of exposed meat is not the main determinant of sexual abuse - if it is at all.

However, coming from their society, our muslim friends do find it very confronting to come face to face with dozens of flashed boobs, thighs and midriffs as they walk down the street.

We should at least empathise with that cultural unease, it is real for them. As confronting for them as it owuld be for us if we, in the 1950s, were suddenly thrown into the 2000s, with our vastly relaxed sexual customs.

JamesH,
I do not attract this much attention in Europe. You auzies are deprived, which is why my “bazooka’s” are so appealing.
aqvarivs,
Rape is about power not about sex. People who like to degrade beauty have a mental illness as far as I am concerned. This is a direct consequence of our public notions and media worship of so called beauty.
Dewi
You are absolutely right. I was enrolled in a PhD at one of your most prestigious universities last year and I thought to myself : how the hell did I get this far and I cannot even spell and punctuate my English. Could it have anything to do with my “bazooka’s”? Will you teach me dewy, coz no-one else has bothered!
Maximus
I am in love with you already. But I just got out of a bad relationship and am not looking for a commitment right now. Sex with no strings attached sounds good to me!
Trueassie
I have been living here for over 27 years. Educated here since I was six. Everything I know, I learnt from your type. Thank you.

Sharkfin

Exactly how are women emasculating men in western societies?

Is it by earning a living? (Women still earn much less than men at equivalent levels of education and experienced – Women still occupy the majority of low paying jobs. Taking the pill? (Not so long ago if a woman fell pregnant she had to marry the man – often to the mans benefit as this meant for him sex, children and a housekeeper and control of his very own empire - his home) Not accepting violence? It is not so long ago that domestic violence was not a crime and only in the 1980’s that rape in marriage became a crime, (before the Women’s Property Act in the 1880’s women were treated legal property of their husband or farther and were not legally able to own anything – every possession in law from clothing to inheritance was the legal property of firstly the father and secondly the husband - it was by the issue of marriage certificate that the woman became the property of the husband and their fore he owned her – and as she was his property - he was legally able and entitled to force sex - this concept hung around in law until 1980’s).

The idea that women are emasculating men is a myth. Only a man can emasculate himself - by behaving like a spoilt child when it comes to sexuality. If a man can only be man by holding power over women he is not a man at all. Accepting the responsibility of being an adult – being responsible for all you own thoughts and actions – that is being a grown up – for the male gender – a man.

The person who calls himself or herself "trueaussie". There is nothing Australian about your methods. Calling people names is childish. Your posts reflect badly on OLO and my country.

Numbat: You actually raise a good point. It does seem that naked Indigenous women of certain cultures weren't as sexualised as modern women. And, I think, there is a kind of irony in the way that Islamic culture has sexualised near completely covered women. Hmmm. Beyond me.

Maybe a true anthropologist out there could help us out here. But then again why would anyone with an ounce of self respect and credibility post here knowing that certain other posters who have another opinion are just going to abuse them rather than engage in sensible debate?

Maybe Graham Young needs to rethink his definition of "robust debate". Anyone can resort to abusive and disrespectful behaviour. Nothing robust or convincing in a post that resorts to personal attack.

I haven't seen the Leunig cartoon, (and I often find myself disagreeing with him,) but there could be other plausible interpretations of its intention. Rather than trying to suggest that women are responsible for provoking unwanted attention, perhaps he was trying to show just how silly the sheik's comments were. (Just putting that one out there- I may be horribly, horribly wrong.) Leunig is no stranger to sarcasm and irony.

To Elka- I'll think you'll find that the vast majority of men found the Mufti's comments, and the attitude towards women displayed, to be appalling. I think what has raised the ire of many here is the suggestion that a large proportion of men agree with such views.

To Country Gal- You're right, men should be outraged by the mufti's comments, implying that they have no self control. I for one would like to add my voice to those ranks of men who state categorically that his comments are offensive to both men as well as women.

The mufti's apology could also belie an antiquated view of women. "You are the cherished pearls, the dearest thing in the world." (see http://weblog.javazen.com/?cat=10,) There is a tendency to simultaneously present women's sexuality as a tool of the devil, but also to deny them any sense of agency. A sense that women are so pure, so above the base nature of men that they have to be hidden away and protected. Thus, in putting women on a pedestal, Islam perpetuates their enslavement.

There is also a tendency to present women in the same manner in the bible and in Christian literature. Being raised in a fundamentalist Christian household, I was warned that I would meet women whose only intention was my seduction. My response? Bring it on. Oh, how fun giving into temptation can be! Religious fundamentalists are right to fear sex. It was one of the key reasons I escaped.

I think women are awesome. But I'm also under no illusion that they're sugar and spice, and all things nice. The irony is that this illusion is shared by much Feminist theory, which presents women as perpetual victims. (The issue of DV has been hijacked by such a viewpoint, and unfortunately, those who point this out are unfairly labeled misogynists, as seen on a number of threads on this forum.)

To JamesH- keep your chin up buddy. As I said, women are awesome. Who cares if you're damned if you do. It can be a hell of a lot of fun along the way.

And vivy sounds like a good place to start...

Sharkfin

You miss my point. Women are responsible for their own image and perceptions not men. Feminist want to raise the social influence of females in a male manufactured environment(emasculation) not in a female manufactured environment. Jane Fonda and Gloria Steinman(?) were both on an episode of Colbert Report saying that the next stage of feminist authority is for women to have their own radio station. That will bring them closer to an equal social standing? There are no women in radio or T.V., print media. Don't tell me Oprah and Martha Stewart aren't equal.
I'm sorry, if women want to be equal to men they're going to have to stop this sexual competition and get on with their life. Men do not compete with women by design, we just do our thing. Guy stuff.
Which is why since the beginning of time we've made every excuse to get out of the house. Cheers.

Aqvarivs

I was speaking about how many men will not own up to the fact that sexual violence against women is a massively ignored problem and how unfortunately, it is a widely held belief that women “ask for it” (especially if dressed “sexy”) or are responsible for it in some other way.

I agree with you that fashion magazines and the women who run them and the women who pose in them contribute to the view that “women are objects for men’s satisfaction, the way to be fulfilled is to increase the value of your commodified body, to be appealing to men.” These magazines oppress women in my view.

But we were talking about sexual violence, I don’t care how “appealing” a woman looks, if a man decides to throw himself on a woman, it is his responsibility alone. Men aren’t animals are they?

“All those who strive for victim status ought to go about in a black sheet, covered from head to toe, so the rest of us can stay out of harms way. “

Many women have had to do this recently. They have had to stay inside their homes rather than go out exercising because of some idiot rapist. Have any men ever avoided leaving the house for fear of rape?
You said, let men be men and women be women as long as no one does any harm. Will the men please stop doing harm now please? Oh good, got that sorted

vivy

yes I'd have to agree that us aussies are deprived, it might have something to do with aussie women but I am not sure and the sexual repression that nobody believes exists.

I hate to break it to you but Maximus is married.

I'd like a consensus of what constitutes rape. I know what I believe it is, but I'd like to hear other peoples opinions. My understanding is that the definition has been expanded to include a wide range of behaviours such as unwelcome attention.

Can attempted seduction be classified as rape?

I do know a few girls who have a favourite outfit in their cupboard which they sometimes refer to as "come and f**k me dress!" I think they were only joking.

Feminist quotes.
"Men are animals. Don't you think so?" -- Ireen von Wachenfeldt, radical feminist leader in Sweden.



"To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo." -- Valerie Solanas, Authoress of the SCUM Manifesto



"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometime gain from the experience," said Catherine Comins, Vassar College Assistant Dean of Student Life in Time

"In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent." -- Catharine MacKinnon, quoted in Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies.

"My feelings about men are the result of my experience. I have little sympathy for them. Like a Jew just released from Dachau, I watch the handsome young Nazi soldier fall writhing to the ground with a bullet in his stomach and I look briefly and walk on. I don't even need to shrug. I simply don't care. What he was, as a person, I mean, what his shames and yearnings were, simply don't matter." -- Marilyn French, in "The Women's Room"

After reading these quotes I just cant seem to find the energy to be offended about being compared to a cat.

Muslim women are like their men - They speak with a forked tongue.

They are coached/trained to always reply to non-Muslims that - to cover up from head to toe is 'very liberating' because they 'stop being a sex symbol' when they don the hijab. A very effective argument to ward off criticism and leave you speechless.

On the other hand those not wearing a hijab, looking every bit modern and complete with lip-stick, will mock you - she is a living proof that you misunderstood what it means to be a Muslim woman.

Whatever you think of them, there is always one who can offer a contradicting argument that you are 'wrong'. Like Muslim men, they are as hypocritical as their twisted sense of logic gets. Their deceptiveness will leave you numb.

So I do not regard any Muslim woman as a lady. I do not wait for them to get out of a lift, I certainly do not open door for Muslim women.

A Muslim woman who is a steadfast believer of that con-man Muhammad, deserved to be regarded as how Islam culture regards her... just a piece of meat, covered or uncovered.

btw, one good way to recognise Muslim deception is to look at what goes on in over 50 Islamic states around the world, then ask ourselves - what happens here if there are more of those creatures around?

Just look at our near neighbour. Islam is the only reason why Indonesia, despite its many islands, is not the least a country of tropical paradise islands.

Islam - A religion that is mother of evil intolerance, has now caused Bali to cease being a paradise island as well.

Sigh...

Hey MEAT,

Yes, I am talking to all you Muslim women out there.

Including that Muslim lawyer (SBS Insight 8/11/06) who does not wear a hijab (in order to better progress her legal career). She said "yes" when asked whether Hilali should go. Her reason was that Hilali is a poor communicator (NOT because Hilali's speech about women is wrong). Did you notice how Keysar Trad bluntly retorted? Did she dare to argue with Keysar Trad?

All you charming Muslim women (Shakira Hussein and Irene Khan included) who consciously or unconsciously soft-sell a Muslim image, you need to placate the public, don't you? Then Muslim issues will simply vanish in thin air.

The alternative is unthinkable and impossible - You can not seriously rebuke your male counterparts, no matter how unacceptable their behaviours, any more than just pretending a gentle chide.

Of course not!

Because I know, you have the 'wisdom', that your male counter-parts are your MASTERS.

Just don't change your religion no matter what. Because that's when you will fully realise the wrath from your MASTERS, and appreciate the true meaning of being just meat, chopped meat !!

So to make life easier for yourself, be hypocritical and deceptively charming to the general public. Your MASTERS like that also.

Hopefully it never dawns upon you that Muhammad was in fact a con-man. You cannot face that possibility. This way at least you will always remain a piece of meat to your MASTERS, not one that will be chopped up.

Elka
You were doing well until the last. I never once said let men be men and women be women so long as no harm is done.

I think men should be men and women should be women regardless of the current trend in social management.

Men are not equal to women, women are not equal to men. Nature/God in Gods wisdom decided this when God/nature decided on the number two for purpose of procreation.

Any conversation about equality is down to social manipulation and as we all know, when you go out to manipulate someone or something it don't necessary work out as you may have planned.

Men are not even equal to men. Because we are not all equal the human experience keeps growing. If ever the dreamy state of total equality ever comes about the world will stagnate.
Revel in your inequality and aspire to be the best you can be.
if something bad happens to you get over it. I'm not trying to be unduely harsh. In my mind and my experience victim is not a healthy condition.
Men and women both behave in the vilest manner towards each other. It's not all, and it's not all at once but, it is all together.

Peace.

Um, Aqvarius, equal does not mean the same. An orange is not the same as an apple but neither is it superior or inferior. It is different, but of equal value to the world and to its plant of origin.
When we talk of equality in human relations, between black and white, or Jew and gentile, or man and woman, we mean that one is not inherently superior or inferior to the other. Yes, they are different ( though not as different from one another as the apple differs from the orange), but they are of equal value.
And you are right, there is probably as much difference between individual members of the same race or gender as there are between women and men, or blacks and whites. That's why defining any group of people according to aprescribed set of rules, behaviours and expectations is so dumb. I meet men I have heaps in common with, who feel like kindred spirits and women who seem to have been born on a different planet and vice versa. But, so what, they all remain equal - in the sense of being no more and no less important than I am.

Ena You say: "...equal does not mean the same. An orange is not the same as an apple but neither is it superior or inferior."

I disagree. An apple is superior in certain aspects. Oranges are superior in relation to, for instance, their juiciness. The crime statistics for my area for 2005/6. Pop. 186, 443 say we had 119 sexual assaults. Thus these particular (lecherous)men are superior at sexual aggression and disrespecting women. But they are far more inferior in their attitude to women than the male who has respect for women.

Also, has anyone picked up on Sheik Halili's insult to the Muslim men who he more or less accuses of idiocy and inferior animalistic behaviours?

Men are not "animals" because of our ability to make moral or ethical choices. Most men know that without permission sexual interaction is shameful abuse. The stats back this up. Fraser says virtually the same thing in relation to Muslim IQ and is tagged a racist.

Dr Winter.

You ask whether Hilali's views are really so unusual (re: female naked flesh being a cue for male sexual aggression). Yet nothing in your article backed this up. You just made assertions. For instance, D.W. says: “This idea is prevalent in Christian culture as well … “ That is a generalisation and unfair to all the real men out here who regard women with genuine esteem and respect.

I can recall one time about 14 years ago when a Baptist preacher asserted that Bible okays raping one’s wife. That created outrage from other Christians (myself included). Also there is an old Catholic saying: "The best defence against lecherous males is modesty". Couldn't you find some examples? And if your assertion was correct then it would follow that rape would be more prevalent amongst church goers. How did you come to your "conclusion"?

Yes I agree there is an undercurrent of disrespect for women in our culture. But I think your average Aussie male knows where the line is and that there is no excuse for perving or aggression towards women.

Ena
We are not all the same, equal, alike, valued, nor deserving of common decency and respect or position. Your sentiment of universal equality is belied by your use of words like Jews, Christians, black, white, apples and oranges. You assert that equality be applied with out regard to these identifiers because everything has the same value in nature.
They don't. Nature is about the hunter and the hunted. There is no equality other than all of nature be expressed naturally.
Except for humans, We consider ourselves above nature and feel inclined to social management. To be socially correct. You can't dismiss my unfounded blather because I have feelings. My opinion is just as valid as your hard earned experience. I deserve(not have earned)equal opportunity. Everyone is equal and all the same.
Except, nature has put in a little safe guard. It's called instinct.
And our instinctive perceptions argue the imposition of social manipulation and so we have more social discord not less. People naturally want to earn their value not be given it. No real person of value wants his or her value legislated, only cheats and liars seek fraudulent identity.

ronnie peters said, "Yes I agree there is an undercurrent of disrespect for women in our culture."

With some, yes, however it is no more so than the undercurrent of disrespect for men.

Let's not idolise women, all have their moments and some have quite ugly attitudes.

equal

• adjective 1 being the same in quantity, size, degree, value, or status. 2 evenly or fairly balanced: an equal contest. 3 (equal to) having the ability or resources to meet (a challenge).

• noun a person or thing that is equal to another.

• verb (equalled, equalling; US equaled, equaling) 1 be equal or equivalent to. 2 match or rival.

— ORIGIN Latin aequalis, from aequus ‘even, level, equal’.

this is the Oxford dictionary definition. Nowhere does it say that it means "the same as" or "identical with" indeed, it says equivalent to. An apple is a fruit, the fruit of the apple tree, it passes on the genes of the apple just as well as the orange passes on the genes of the orange tree. They are not the same, they are not identical, they may differ in terms of juiciness or flavour or nutrition, but as the fruit or seed pods of their respective trees they are of equal value to their species and to their planet.
A woman is a human animal, of equal value to her species and her planet as her male equivalent. She is not the same as a man, nor, indeed, unless she is an identical twin, is she the same as any other woman, but her value is equal to every other human animal. No more, no less, no matter her individual strength, health, brains, aggression or whatever. In rights and inherent value she is equivalent to any other human animal but, no, she is unique, she is not the same as any other man or any other woman. That is why using "equal" to mean the same and then arguing that men and women are not equal because they are not the same is a non argument -to prove that, you'd have to rank every human in the world. If you want to argue they are not equal, you need to come clean and agree you are argung that you believe men have greater intrinsic worth or value than women, or vice versa.

Great comments have been made, I don’t have to add much.
I agree with the author that Hilali’s remarks are not only insulting to women but also to men.
But the Dr Winter makes it even worse by saying that the norm in Australia is to consider women as sexual predators of unwitting men who simply can’t help themselves.
I don't think this is the general norm.
Now not only Hilali has insulted both men and women, but Dr Winter has also bashed the Australian norm in regard to this matter.

Women in primitive tribes are almost naked; I wonder whether the rape rates there are much higher than in the Muslim countries where women totally cover up.
Forced marriage also counts as rape, I should think.

Runner, it’s not ‘looking’ that is a crime- it’s raping. Fashion can never be the problem- rape is a power thing, it is aggression and violence towards women.
If fashion is blamed for the rape of women but not the rapist, then the items in a shop would be the problem but not the shop lifters. The criminals are the thieves and the rapists, not fashion or sales items.
Vivy “My best australian born friend (with what I term as no body shape) can wear exactly the same clothes as I do…”
Do you always put your friends down? You sound like you are more concerned about advertising your body than about the feelings of your best friend. Charming!

Gecko
“We should at least empathise with that cultural unease, it is real for them. As confronting for them as it owuld be for us if we, in the 1950s, were suddenly thrown into the 2000s, with our vastly relaxed sexual customs.”
Wonderful different perspective added to the conversation. Not that it will change our fashion, but it‘s a good habit to look at something from the other side’s pov and is often forgotten by many. I think it might be quite hard for most people to be tolerant about intolerance though ;)

continued

The respect for someone else’s property is missing. Criminal behaviour in where someone else’s property (either body or possessions) are abused by rape or stealing is a form of aggression in where violence is used to get what the offender wants.

I think Ena explains well what is meant by equality, but is misunderstood by some. In a time where many people want to be different or seen as individuals, perhaps the term equality is not favoured. Many people want to be quicker, richer, leaner, more successful and more beautiful than the Joneses.
The hard reality is: we are all equal. Meaning, we all have the same value.
As Ena explains as I interpret it, there is much room inside the box of ‘equality’ for being different.

Without equality there can never be total freedom or peace.
An apple can not be superior or inferior to an orange because this judgement would depend on who’s judging. If you say that an orange is superior because it is more juicy than an apple, I figure that the judgement is made by someone who likes juiciness. Another judge might prefer ‘crispiness’ and would exclaim that an apple is far more superior. Therefore, an apple and an orange are equal.
Men and women are equal; people who do the judging merely express their opinion but there is no proof that their judgements are facts.
We are all people, and in principle we are all equal. Therefore we all should have equal opportunities, equal education etc. We all should be treated with respect and treat others with respect because no one is superior or inferior to us.

Quickly addressing criminal behaviour: a factor to take into account, when thinking abut the cause of criminality, perhaps is the feeling of inequality.
Did criminals in their childhood receive an equally good upbringing, equally good opportunities of e.g. education and environment, and equal respect than non criminals or successful people?

Ena. You are talking of something in itself. I am talking about the external qualities, characteristics that are superior or inferior, or processes that can create superior or inferior outcomes.

You say : “ They (an apple and an orange) are not the same they may differ in terms of juiciness or flavour or nutrition, but as the fruit they are of equal value to their species and to their planet.” They are not the same value to me though in a particular situation. The orange is superior at giving a nice juicy snack.

It must follow using your apple/orange argument that a rapist and a respectful male are of equal value to women and society. Paraphrasing your argument further, they (a rapist and a respectful male) are not the same they are not identical (agreed – I will put my refutations or agreements in brackets here in this para) they may differ in terms of behaviour (agreed they differ and at the same time I disagree because some behaviours are superior to others – we judge this by the outcomes - rape is horror and respect is nurturing ) but as males they are of equal value to their planet. (This thinking is flawed. Again the rapists display inferior qualities and create harmful outcomes).

Whether or not rapists are inferior human beings and useful to the furtherance of the human condition is your decision. I think rape is extremely harmful – no excuses. Thus, given that all things are measured in degrees, I think rapists are inferior scum with little, if any, intrinsic value. They destroy their own value.

I am not arguing that ordinary men and women are not equal in the context of their humanity. I am recognising in a non-value laden way that our difference in sex, gender, socialisation and individual characteristics does create in some men (and women) abilities and behaviour that are inferior or superior.

More to come

ENA continued

There seems to be a belief that the words superior and inferior must be value laden. For instance: That you are superior at presenting an argument than I, does not mean that I am in inferior human of less value. It simply means that I am inferior at that particular task.

Consider the word “adult”. Hasn’t it gained more connotations since the sex shop industry has flourished? Also, racists use superior and inferior and derivatives which has tainted the words’ meanings.

Just to recap, if you say I as a human am inferior for being a woman that is wrong , if you say that I as woman am a good cook that is a gendered response, if you say I as a women am better at breast feeding my baby, I would say that you would be correct to say that I am superior in that particular aspect of parenthood. I am not a better human or even parent –just superior in that aspect. This is just an example I am a male.

I certainly have not argued that men and women are not equal in their intrinsic value as humans. That is your mistaken reading. In most cases, being inferior or superior in certain abilities that our sex determines does not equate to saying that a person’s whole intrinsic worth depends on some extrinsic ability. Indeed, psychologists are at pains to tell people with low self esteem that their intrinsic worth does not depend on some extrinsic ability. It is ironic but to follow your line of thinking, Ena, one would have to agree that say Lance Armstrong (Six time Tour De France winner) is a superior human of greater value (nonsense). Follow mine and he is simply a superior cyclist with no greater of lesser worth than grandma who rides her bike to the shops.

To say that one sex has a greater ability then the other at a certain task because of their sex (or age) does not equate to women or men having an overall greater or lesser intrinsic worth as a human.

Here is a better question. If men and women are of equal value; how come more human embryos develop into females than males?

The only thing refreshing about Ms Winter's article is her acknowledgment that

"Hilali and Leunig may both hold women in contempt, but it seems to me that they are holding men in even greater contempt"

It distresses me immensely that the Australian media has only concentrated on the offensiveness of Hilali's comments about women, when his slur on men is of a far greater magnitude. It just shows what a feminist/feminised society we live in. All this outrage about women being slurred and absolutely none about men being slurred!

I worry, however, that Ms Winters might actually agree with Hilali that men actually are "penis-controlled automatons unable to reflect on their own actions or consider women as people". This is evidenced by her comment "the solution to this is not for men to start thinking but for women to go and hide". Why, Ms Winters, should men "start thinking", if THEY ALREADY DO SO - if Hilali's comments are nothing but sexist myths about both men and women?

And, Ms Winters, why did you conveniently omit the fact that men are twice as likely to be victims of violence as are women (the ratio is 3 to 1 in young people)? And the fact that more than a quarter of all sexual abuse of children is commited against BOYS. And that almost 30% of sexual assaults in the past 12 months were commited against MEN. And that, of men who have been sexually assaulted since the age of 15, the vast majority (63.9%) were assaulted by a FEMALE in the most recent incident. All of these figures are contained in the ABS Personal Safety Survey 2005.

I would appreciate it if we moved to talking about violence against PEOPLE rather than just violence against women. Your feminist bias does you a great disservice, Ms Winters.

Our society seems to be having great difficulty in dealing with heterosexuality.

Many early and some current feminists believed;

"In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent." -- Catharine MacKinnon.

The simple fact is that every woman must be willing to be identified as a lesbian to be fully feminist." (National NOW Times, Jan.1988).

Heterosexuality was regarded as abnormal and some feminist thought that the only reason women were heterosexual at all is because they had been condition by the patriarchial society.

It seems that our society struggles between making people as asexual as possible and sexual desire. Sex or the promise of sex is a powerful manipulative tool, cutting below the veneer of civilization and striking a the very heart of the primative neanderthal beginnings of our species.

It is even possible that before St...(I cant remember who)who wrote a book listing all the sins and the penance for those sins. Human sexuality was at war with it self.

Religion, Sexual Repression, Guilt and Hypocrisy
http://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewarticle.asp?AuthorID=22136&id=24506

The shift of the debate to issues of equality is interesting. By saying that women are equal to men or that men are equal to women sets one or the other up as the standard. The statement that men are equal to women is not often made mind you, although it is implied in some of these posts that men are not equal to women in policies such as are debated here.

To be considered the same is to attempt to eradicate gender difference and to create a gender-neutral society. Is that ever going to happen? It seems that the move towards gender-neutral policy making has just created more division in some areas.

What a silly, silly lady you are Mrs Winter. How can you compare a philosophy, held not just by Hilali but seemingly 90% of the muslim community who have defended him, where women are 90% to blame for rape and adultery so that she should be "jailed for life" while he should be "counselled in morals" (these were Hilali's words in his sermon or the next day), to men who - slightly chauvanistically - speak merely about the lure of beautiful women. Even the worst examples of chauvanism can not compare to what Hilali said. However, this is still totally besides the point, which is not that one man said such a thing, but that, yet again, the entire Islamic community has defended it in one way or another. Those who say that Hilali has apologised are sick bigots and liars, as they have the audacity to lie so openly to our faces and the the rudeness and bigotry (because we are not of their tribe) to think that we are actually that stupid, or they simply don't care what we think.

What those such as Mrs Winter do is a massive disservice to any potential reformations or critical upheavals that may be wanting to happen within the Islamic communties the world over. By saying that there is no problem when the Hilali's or the Feiz's (the other rape promoting sheik) say such bigoted things, or by thinking that it is necessary to remind everyone that other cultures have bad people too, is not only rude and bigotted to those like myself, but also to the entire Islamic community, as it treats them as though they are ALL like some disabled child who they cannot treat like other "normal" children (or just people, even adults) because they don't consider them as full an agent as they would the "normal" people. This is tacit racism, supremicism, and it is sickenningly unfair to those actually within the Islamic community who are trying to work towards reforming their culture and religion, the same way that Luther did in the Christian dark ages.

You could draw a parallel between the feminists attacking Leunig and the reaction of some Muslims to the Danish cartoons (which unlike Leunig probably did go a bit far).

If there is a funny side to this article it is the Oz high priestesses of feminism issuing a fatwah against Leunig's wee, vulnerable man who is usually depicted as being so hopeful and worshipful, yet at the same time so totally overwhelmed and disempowered by the power of femininity displayed before him by woman.

Nothing wrong with a woman playing the temptress either, it is a time-honoured and valuable role.

You really have to wonder about the arrogance and sensitivity of people who are so threatened by a cartoonist that they feel obliged to have a swing at him.

"I have a dream!"
The eponymous Sheik Sheillelagh, having infringed, somewhat akin to the Imam under discussion, the tests that Howard/Beazley's thought police impose for citizenship, is sentenced to remedial constraint under Amanda Vanstone's authority.
In my dream Amanda, with wisdom akin to Solomon, imposes a year's worth of periodic detention: to serve drinks (no Coke - just tea, fruit juice, and alcohol if requested), for the full day, on every members day, at Australia's most active nudist club (wherever that may be).

DEAR WEST, you said "The fact that Christian communities experience an extremely high level of child sex and psychological abuse"

I suppose that the west is the only place that has domestic violence and prostitution as well, considering that in the west, these things are reported and it is not taboo, as it is in many muslim nations where it is not even admitted let alone reported.

The same can be said for rape and child sexual assualt. In the West, these things are abhorrent and taboo, this is why our society at large discusses these issues. However, in many other nations, in particular Islamic nations, these crimes again are not even admitted at large.

For example, in Pakistan a recent study done by an internation Islamic women's group found that 70% of all women who are in jail in Pakistan are in there for adultery, when in fact, most of them were raped but charged with adultery because, as has been in the news lately, Pakistan has a barbaric law that requires 4 male witnesses to prove that she was not raped. Also, in Afghanistan, a recent UN study group found that nearly every family in the country has been affected by paeodaphilia but they refuse to even acknowledge it at all, as a documentary maker who did a film on this issue in the country has gone in hiding.

A diasporic case: 3 years ago in England, a sheik was accused by one muslim family of molesting their child. Rather than console them, the other members of the Islamic community spat at them, threatenned them and refused to admit that it occurs often.

My point is, just because the West is free and open and discusses all sorts of problems, it doesn't mean that we are the only culture with these problems, in fact, the exact opposite is true if you care to look at all the UN/NGO reports on the matter. I suppose then in Suadi Arabia, that they don't have an aids problem as they don't admit it.

Muslim, Christian or Feminist. They are all religious fundamentalists. And they are all the same hypocrites.

There's only one real difference between the mufti and the feminists. The feminists keep chanting, like so many sheep that "porn causes rape".

At least the mufti saves his rape blame for real tits, and not paper ones.