Re: Modesty not misogyny at root of practice, Letter July 22
Letter writer Mohamed S. Ibrahim may be right that it was not misogyny but her own lack of modesty for which the woman in Sudan was being punished. What he fails to understand is that we in Canada (except perhaps Ibrahim and his fellow believers) consider physical punishment in all its forms inhumane and have banned it for all crimes. Using passages from the Qur`an, or any other holy book, is a cop-out for those who practise this kind of inhumanity.
James Thompson, Thornhill
You cannot compare a nude woman being arrested in Canada and a woman being flogged in Sudan for wearing trousers. A nude male would also be arrested in Canada. However, a man wearing trousers would not be publicly flogged in Sudan. This inconsistency – the fact that woman are treated more harshly than men and have to adhere to a totally different set of rules – is the basis behind the statement of the original letter writer Garry Burke that many Islamic laws are misogynistic.
Lerryn Pitcher, Markham
First, various courts in Canada have addressed the issue of nudity, often ruling that it does not cause a "risk of harm" and is not a criminal act. And demonstrations and events involving public nudity are not particularly rare in Canada, either (see the Naked World Bike Ride as one example).
More to the point, however, the Canadian nudity laws that he references apply (when enforced) to men and women equally. By contrast, in Sudan it is against the law for women to wear trousers, but not, apparently, for men to do so. This double standard is why the Sudanese law in question is aptly described as misogynistic.
If the world is indeed "wobbly like drunken rats," as Mr. Ibrahim writes, then I would humbly suggest that it is because people continue to defend public flogging as a reasonable response to a woman's decision to wear a pair of pants.
Jeff Kelly, Kitchener
........or nonsensical attitudes like this:
No comments:
Post a Comment