Border Paranoia in Fortress Australia

The imaginative faculties of standard Australian politicians retreat to some strange, deathly…

Where the Palestine laboratory takes us all

By Antony Loewenstein Israel's war on Gaza since 7 October has caused the…

No, no, no, no. Not more ‘illegals’!

By Bert Hetebry A group of South Asian men arrived on our doorstep…

Rafah, Gaza: Urgent Statement from CEOs of Humanitarian…

Oxfam Media Release We are appalled by the harrowing developments in Rafah, Gaza’s…

Joe Biden: The Damnation of Age

He was sweet and well meaning, but he was old. He was…

Revealed: Properties in nature's firing line

With Australians enduring intense climate-related disasters during the past five years, analysts…

Outbound Train

By James Moore “The two most powerful warriors are patience and time.” -…

Here Come the Steroid Games

To attribute weighty moral codes to athletes has always been a silly…

«
»
Facebook

Pauline’s Creepy Muslims

By Bob Rafto

A recent study found that clowns are considered the creepiest profession by members of the public along with taxidermists, sex shop owners, funeral directors, taxi drivers and the unemployed.

“Creepiness is something distinct from fear,” David Livingstone Smith, a professor of philosophy from the University of New England, Maine, told Late Night Live.

“We feel fear when we have a sense that we are in danger, that there is some actual or impending threat.

“But creepiness is an attitude of simultaneous fascination and repulsion.”

The study found creepiness to be, by an large, part of the human response to the “ambiguity of threat”.

When it comes to the creepiness of clowns, Dr Livingstone Smith suggests it is all about their painted faces.

“Their fixed facial expression is mask-like — it belies that characteristic of a living breathing human being,” he says.

While notions of creepiness tend to be considered trivial, Dr Livingston Smith says the things that inspire a sense of creepiness — the grotesque, the non-human — have been used throughout history to persecute groups of people.

“Many of the worst atrocities that human beings have ever perpetrated on one another — Nazi Germany, Rwanda — have involved dehumanisation,” he says.

“We make monsters of those we dehumanise. They become all the more disturbing, all the more threatening and that elicits harsh, degrading, deadly behaviour toward them.”

It’s very creepy that Pauline, I believe, has fused threat and creepiness together to demonize Muslims.

Muslim women wearing niqab or a burqa would not be unlike clowns where the real face is hidden and to quote from the above paragraph, “it belies that characteristic of a living breathing human being”.

Pauline considers Muslim women to be a threat and has called for a ban on the of wearing burqas and niqabs in public places. Someone should tell Pauline that the garb was designed for public places.

The questions I pose are:

Is Pauline Hanson dehumanising Muslims?

If so, Dr Livingston Smith’s assertion is very disturbing.

“We make monsters of those we dehumanise. They become all the more disturbing, all the more threatening and that elicits harsh, degrading, deadly behaviour toward them”.

paulineMosques have been fire bombed, angry and violent protests have occurred against the building of mosques, and ‘Sharia law is coming’ is spread all over the net. How it’s coming and how it will be implemented is not disclosed, but it’s coming.

An ‘RSL war memorial has been demolished to erect a mosque’ and the outrage was immense. Shame the story wasn’t true. And then we have the ‘capitalist Halal’.There are a lot more stories, like Muslims taking our jobs, and so on and so on ad nauseum.

In my opinion we are dehumanising Muslims and at the same time priming hot heads to possibly commit terrorists acts against the Muslim community. And the hot heads were evident to see in recent demonstrations.

To put this dehumanisation into context, a poll showed that 49% of the population was in agreement with Hanson to ban Muslim immigration. She thought she was robbed (in the poll result). “It should have been a lot more” she moaned.

She may be right, and she is leading the charge to take us on a dark road to the future where intolerance will be the norm against any minority who does not conform to our (or her?) customs and beliefs.

Unfortunately Hanson and the LNP will ensure the dehumanising of Muslims continue, not for the good of the country, but so that they can keep fuelling a base of xenophobic voters for personal gain.

 

32 comments

Login here Register here
  1. townsvilleblog

    What I find really creepy is the federal government telling us that the unemployment figure is 5.7% when independent studies by Morgans Research shows the figure to be 10.4%. I wonder who most people believe from their life experience?

  2. keerti

    A creepy nightmare of the future….hanson and trump as respective president and PM! No place left to hide!

  3. jimhaz

    The aim of those religious people who make it some form of law to wear a hijab is precisely to dehumanise – to make into an obedient robot. The Christians used the same tactic with nuns.

  4. Peter F

    I have said elsewhere that Judy Small sums up people like PH in her song ‘You don’t speak for me”.

  5. Harquebus

    Photoshopping someone to look like a clown is not dehumanizing them?
    All religions should be relegated to the lunatic fringe where they belong.

  6. @RosemaryJ36

    jimhaz: Please permit me to correct you – it does not dehumanise – what it does do is desexualise. By removing the sexual persona of a woman, she is able to gain protection and carry out her duties unmolested. This applies to nuns of all religious persuasions as well as Muslim women.

  7. bobrafto

    Harquebus
    I coulda have splashed a lot more paint on, but the reality is with her ready made red clown hair all she needed was just a small lick of paint. But you do have a point, however I’m only dehumanizing one person, Pauline is demonizing 500,000 people that over time will have far more graver consequences.

  8. etnorb

    So, by wearing any of these repressive forms of clothing, ALL forms of molestation etc are apparently not experienced by these Muslim women & the Religious order Nuns? I do not think any of these “garments” will stop all rapes, harrassments, molestations, sexual advances etc from occurring. Evil (mostly) men will still attack any woman they feel like, regardless of their attire. To me, the wearing of any of these forms of “coverings” is nothing more than the male “need” to dominate females, whether they be of Muslim religion or even the “main stream” Christian religions. Personally, I am apprehensive whenever I am faced with any female wearing body or full face coverings–especially the burqua, & who is to say that ALL persons wearing a burqua are actually female? For all we know there could be a male inside this clothing, possibly a terrorist? One other point which I think has still not been fully explained, when anyone enters a bank or other Government office etc, & they are wearing a full-face helmet (or even in some instances a hat or cap!), there are notices displayed stating that the said items are to be removed. And what about when having a license or passport photograph taken? Also, when Western women visit any of these Muslim countries, they have to wear some sort of head cover, so why is it ok or “allowed” for any Muslim woman here in Australia to be covered in this way, when our laws or customs do not dictate that this is required? I do not agree with everything that Pauline Hanson has to say, but on some of these contentious Muslim so-called “religious reasons” (or are they?) for having to wear any sort of full body or head cover, she seems to me to make some sense!

  9. bobrafto

    especially the burqua, & who is to say that ALL persons wearing a burqua are actually female?

    Could be a drag queen.

    Also, when Western women visit any of these Muslim countries, they have to wear some sort of head cover, so why is it ok or “allowed” for any Muslim woman here in Australia to be covered in this way, when our laws or customs do not dictate that this is required?

    That is a condition when you enter a Muslim country, you have a choice of not going there and here in good ol’ oz we can wear what we like including burqas. It’s supposed to be a free country except for Muslims in your musings.

  10. kerri

    Why is everyone so bogged down in the relevant reasons for niqab hijab or burka???
    We live in a society that makes allowances for as many and varied forms of dress as it does forms of religion.
    It is not our place to judge why a woman chooses to dress the way she does! Motorcycle helmets must be removed when entering banks etc so maybe that sets a precedent but if we insist that women have to dress a certain way to appease paranoia then we are being equally oppressive to women and their personal choices as was recently displayed in Cannes. For many muslim women displaying their face and hair in public is as offensive and oppressive as asking a nun to go topless at the beach. Pauline’s paranoia stems from small minded, fish shop gossip that leads her to believe she represents “most Australians” she should not be entertained let alone supported. She is a bigot and seeks to dehumanise as Bob Rafto has pointed out.
    The real “slippery slope” for any issue is the practice of dehumanising minority groups to appease their critics. The same argument applies to same sex marriage.
    Demonise and vilify with lies, anyone who doesn’t fit your mould to bring them down and delegitimise their human rights. Divide and conquer. However you want to put it, it is petty minded politicising of other peoples lives and it has no place in a progressive society.

  11. bobrafto

    etnob

    you could have informed yourself by googling your queries.

    The requirements for hijab in islam dont include covering the face. Thats just a societal thing, so they can take the face covering off with no problems. And as others have pointed out, they are usually searched/ID’d by female security in private booths.
    The exact rules for hijab are: In front of men who are direct family (fathers, sons, brothers, uncles, grandfathers, etc.) and in front of women, they have to cover breasts, genitals and ass (so what a bikini covers).
    In front of men who arent direct family (cousins and further) they need to cover everything except the face and hands, and her clothes cant be tight in such a way that it shows off her figure.
    With her husband she can get totally naked and have sexytiemz.
    Face coverings are as i mentioned totally a societal thing. I heard that it started with a girl who was so beautiful that her face was enough to give most people some ahem trouble down there, so she started covering it, and then other girls went “i’m more beautiful than her i should cover too” then it stuck or something but i doubt thats what happened. Anyway, my point is that a practicing muslim woman shouldnt have any problems uncovering her face at the airport, or anywhere else really.
    Edit: Source: I’m a muslim

  12. Kaye Lee

    “And what about when having a license or passport photograph taken? ”

    Head coverings worn for religious reasons may be worn, but must be adjusted so that your whole face is visible, from the bottom of your chin to the top of your forehead, and both edges of your face. There should also be no shadows cast on your face.

    It is understandable that at various times and in various places facial identification may be necessary, so the answer is simple: ask women to show their faces when identification is needed.

    This is the current practice where these women pass through customs and security checks at our airports (surely a place where security is of utmost concern). Common sense prevails as Muslim women understand and appreciate that in circumstances where their identity needs to be verified they have to remove their face covering.

    In 2012, the NSW government addressed this issue by engaging those most affected, namely Muslim women, and legislation was passed setting the parameters for the requirement of removal of face covering for identification purposes. No drama, no headlines, no cheap political pointscoring and no personal opinion by NSW government MPs that they wished the attire wasn’t worn in NSW.

  13. diannaart

    Spot on, Kaye Lee – could you give Turnbull lessons in what the “sensible centre” actually means?

  14. kerri

    Nail on head yet again Kaye Lee!

  15. Michael

    bobrafto: would this be missing from your comment? – a paternalistic society run by self perpetuating sexually immature males?
    Edit: source: Playboy reader of articles in 70’s and 80’s and occasional, very seldom, even then a max of 5 seconds, fleeting glance at carefully folded centrefold.

  16. bobrafto

    Michael
    I got your imagery re Playboy however at certain times, I’m a bit thick which is right now and I’m not comprehending your question.

  17. Kaye Lee

    I have spent a lot of time in the Western suburbs of Sydney and I have never seen anyone wearing the burqa – that seems more a Taliban thing in Afghanistan. I’ve seen a couple wearing the niqab but I bet their daughters choose not to. I know many women who choose to wear a hijab. I am sure there are a multitude of reasons for that choice, none of which are my business. I fully understand the argument put forward by some very strong Muslim women who say they want to be judged for who they are, not how they look, a concept completely alien to way too many Australians, both male and female.

  18. Matters Not

    There’s lots of generalisations (and many more misunderstandings) when it comes to ‘understanding’ Islam. First and foremost, the religion known as Islam has attitudes, values and beliefs that extend across any spectrum one might wish to employ. In that respect, Islam is much the same as Christianity in the sense that it’s characterised by extensive diversity. For all practical purposes, there isn’t one Islam but a whole range. For all practical purposes, there isn’t one Christianity but a whole range of attitudes, values and beliefs that are quite diverse.

    What seems to upset many people is the ‘dress’ of many Muslim women. Yet most seem to be unaware that the Qur’an or Koran only makes reference to ‘dress’ on two occasions and in each instance it calls for there to be ‘modesty in dress’ for BOTH men and women. Yes I know that there is an obvious double standard. Go to Surfers Paradise and watch the males in their Speedos strutting up the beach while the women bake in black hijabs. But get this, it’s not down to the Qur’an. It’s not down to Islam.

    Why is it so?

    Religions don’t exist in isolation from Cultures. Rather the meaning given to a religion is always modified by a culture and those modifications are reciprocated in the different meanings given to that very same religion. Think you understand the essence of Christianity, then you will be surprised if you visit the Islands of the Torres Strait.

    But back to Muslim women and their ‘dress’. Would you believe that the ‘dress’ came well before the religion. That the culture also came well before the religion as well. Why the extensive ‘coverings’? Have you ever been in a desert environment when the wind was blowing? And was doing same for days on end? Take my word for it, you really need to cover your mouth, nose and eyes. Think about it. Just sayin ..

  19. Kaye Lee

    “who is to say that ALL persons wearing a burqua are actually female? For all we know there could be a male inside this clothing, possibly a terrorist? ”

    I very much doubt that a terrorist in Australia would try to sneak past wearing a burqa. As for knowing what sex someone is, I see some very scantily clad and androgynous people in Sydney where I can’t tell that. Why does it matter? Nutters don’t wear uniforms – they come in all shapes and sizes. Luckily in Australia, we have remained comparatively unscathed from terrorism – not so from domestic violence sadly. Suicide is also a tragic problem in this country. Let’s focus on the real issues and stop trying to tell people what to wear, who they can marry, what church they must go to…..

  20. AsTheStomachTurns

    We could use Europe as a role model here, muslim men attacking non-muslim women for not conforming to sharia law. Bring it on if that’s what you want but never forget Hansen was given her racist label for trying to re-introduce the white Australia policy by war criminal (read my lips) Howard after he had her offices raided in search of something to crucify her for. Her crime? Getting too many votes. Get over it, get on with it and decide where in the sand the line will be drawn where freedom of religion and freedom from religion becomes clear.

  21. bobrafto

    Michael
    bobrafto: would this be missing from your comment? – a paternalistic society run by self perpetuating sexually immature males?
    Edit: source: Playboy reader of articles in 70’s and 80’s and occasional, very seldom, even then a max of 5 seconds, fleeting glance at carefully folded centrefold.

    After a good night sleep, I realized that you attributed the comment to me, but not so, I was remiss in not putting a link to it.

    I’m an atheist and have been for a few decades after seeing the light thru the pages of Penthouse, Playboy was a bit down market.

    As for your question, the only comprehension I get from sexually immature males is another term for wankers which I suppose links in with your Playboy mention.

  22. bobrafto

    God I called your name
    when the bombing raids started
    But you never came

    God I called your name
    When the bombs killed my children
    But you never came

    May I remind those who believe in God that any plea for help Always goes unanswered.

  23. wam

    hair of a female arouses the male in most cultures, as did the nape of the neck in the japan of the geisha. Burqas, hijab, scarves etc all cover this sexy element from men’s eyes.
    However we try to rationalise the situation, the dress is connected to a cultural region NOT religion. If women were to be covered before god then they would wear it everywhere, not just outside?
    kerri: Why is everyone so bogged down in the relevant reasons for niqab hijab or burqa???
    These are cultural dress from various countries and imposed on women who are beaten or killed if the do not comply with the men’s laws.
    When idiots like liz hayes’ showon the burqa the dress she use was a niqab from Saudi not the Afghan’pakistan burqa. She links the dress NOT to a country but to ISLAM. If that mistake become accepted by the men of Islam ALL females will be so covered.

    ps you are right jimaz the point is to dehumanise women to the level of a chattel.

  24. bobrafto

    you are right jimaz the point is to dehumanise women to the level of a chattel.

    I agree to a certain degree but I believe one has to respect their culture.

    It possibly still continues, if Greeks or Italian women lost their husbands or a family member they had to wear black clothing till death for some of them, others up to 2 years and from head to toe.

    With time and the passing of generations old cultural traditions start to lose flavour and I don’t see many Greek or Italian mammas out there wearing black.

    The same will happen with the burqa

  25. bobrafto

    ps you are right jimaz the point is to dehumanise women to the level of a chattel.

    I would also like to add that the above is another instance of dehumanizing Muslims, lets look in our own backyards first before we cast that aspersion. I think Abbott in particular thinks of women as chattels as do most of the LNP.

    Lets look at DV we dispose of at least 2 spouses a week, does that figure correlate in proportion with the Muslim community?

    For the number of women fleeing DV how many are Muslims?

    The point I’m making, regardless of race there is a number of people who will treat women badly and as chattels.

  26. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Hear, hear Bob Rafto,

    targeting any demographic for personal, political or professional gain is reprehensible. Hanson and her pack are proving that yet again.

    As far as the ‘creepiest’ members of our society goes, I have a confession. I tick two of those boxes (amongst my diverse other skills). I’ll take it as a badge of honour since those who would judge according to those values, I don’t have any respect for anyway!

  27. bobrafto

    From my story
    “She may be right, and she is leading the charge to take us on a dark road to the future where intolerance will be the norm against any minority who does not conform to our (or her?) customs and beliefs.” I omitted to add “Is it hard to comprehend that scenario as though it wouldn’t happen? then keep in mind under our names the government has locked up innocent people and children in gulags indefinitely”.

  28. Zathras

    “who is to say that ALL persons wearing a burqua are actually female? For all we know there could be a male inside this clothing, possibly a terrorist? ”

    I suppose Santa Claus should be approached with a high degree of caution this festive season.
    He even admits to watching children as they sleep and go about their daily lives and is known to enter private premises without permission.

    Who knows who is lurking behind that beard and what he/she’s hiding under that stuffed outfit.

  29. Zathras

    Most people are still unable to discriminate between culture and religion.

    Islam arose in the Middle East yet most of its followers live elsewhere – the majority in Indonesia, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.

    Two of those nations at some stage made a woman their Prime Minister and burquas are relatively unseen there.
    Despite historical landmarks in some countries it is not based in the Middle East and has no global hierarchy.

    Christianity is also a Middle Eastern religion (a breakaway sect of Judaism) but where is it’s centre?

    Vatican City? Utah? Louisiana? Sydney? It’s certainly not Jerusalem.

    There are literally thousands of Christian-based sects (a new one breaks away every generation) that disagree wildly but nobody seems willing to pick one and use it generalise about the rest.

    Most of the criticism is the result of cultural differences and is born out of fear, ignorance and intolerance.

    That’s what religions are there for – to try to make “them” just like one of “us”.

  30. Matters Not

    suppose Santa Claus should be approached with a high degree of caution this festive season.
    He even admits to watching children as they sleep and go about their daily lives and is known to enter private premises without permission.

    Indeed! And he is a communist as well. He, himself, provides the evidence. He is forever chanting: Ho! Ho! Ho!. He can’t let the memory of that revolutionary communist Ho Chi Minh fade away. And his clothes are always RED. So many signs. And he doesn’t knock on doors, wait to be invited in, instead he furtively descends down chi mneys.

    As for your main point:

    people are still unable to discriminate between culture and religion

    Yes. These concepts, and the differences between same, are not well understood.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page