I just don't get it

Today I was reading an editorial in the Age, applauding a local mufti on calling for desegregation in mosques.

IN MOSQUES across Australia Muslims are accustomed to men and women sitting separately. This physical division might change now that the Mufti of Australia, Sheikh Fehmi Naji El-Imam, has taken the enlightened step of calling for desegregation in mosques. Although he does not have direct authority over other imams, his title allows him to wield considerable influence within the wider Muslim community.

But a more serious divide between the sexes that needs to be bridged has been recognised by a report that shows some imams simply do not consider women equal to men. The report, made public last week, shocked many with its findings that some imams in Victoria condoned rape within marriage, domestic violence, polygamy, welfare fraud and exploitation of women.

The editorial, which can be found here, says.

How can a ghost writer in a newspaper owned by a large media conglomerate actually claim they know what is "enlightened" and what is not?

I just find it amazing how there is often one rule for muslims when it comes to reportage, and another for christians.

The rest of the article goes onto discuss domestic violence and the report that was mentioned earlier.

But the whole thing reeks of cultural superiority and reminds me of the way Aboriginal men are treated.

In this piece, domestic violence is seen as entrenched within Muslim households and although it claims that "domestic violence may not be worse in Muslim communities" it further says "it is a problem that can sometimes exist because of entrenched cultural practice."

So why do Australians as a whole have high rates of domestic violence?

According to the Australian Parliament library website:

The best indicators available to date about the levels of violence against women in Australia are from the 1996 ABS publication Women's Safety Survey and the more recent ABS Personal Safety Survey 2005 that surveyed both men and women. The surveys asked women about their experiences of violence and found that:

5.8 per cent of women had experienced violence in the 12 month period preceding the survey in 2005 compared with 7.1 per cent in 1996

4.7 per cent of these women had experienced physical violence (this includes physical assault and threat of physical assault) in 2005 compared with 5.9 per cent in 1996, and 1.6 per cent had experienced sexual violence (this includes sexual assault and threat of sexual assault) compared to 1.5 per cent in 1996

Of the women who experienced sexual violence during the 12 months prior to the 2005 survey 21 per cent had experienced sexual assault by a previous partner in the most recent incident, and 39 per cent by a family member or friend

The 2005 survey also showed that of those women who were physically assaulted in the 12 months prior to the survey, 38 per cent were physically assaulted by their male current or previous partner. Of the women who had experienced violence by a current partner, 10 per cent had a violence order issued against their current partner and of those women who had violence orders issued, 20 per cent reported that violence still occurred.

So is it due to an entrenched cultural practice within Australia? Most media don't ever touch the subject of cultural practice and religion to explain rates of domestic violence within the general community.

The other thing that annoyed me about this piece was the fact that the Age was rather shallowly congratulating the desegregation of mosques, and therefore looking down their noses at those mosques that choose to separate men and women.

The way I interpreted the piece, this segregation seemed to be linked to inequality among muslim men and women.

This can be seen when they critize some Islamic leaders, or those arguing for cultural diversity, for rejecting the original report

"In response to the Islamic Women's Welfare Council report, there no doubt will be those who argue that cultural diversity is sacrosanct. Such views are a distortion of the value of diversity and are irrelevant in the face of core values that must be accepted by all who live in this society. These include the shared acceptance of the rule of law and the values on which Australian law is based, including equality of men and women.

As if Australian law preaches equality between men and women. We still have a long way to go - women are still paid lower rates and often do not get a voice in key decision making affecting them - an example highlighted in the abortion pill fiasco led by Tony Abbott.

I imagine there would be few muslims who would argue for rape and polygamy, those issues highlighted in the report.

So why are normal Muslim cultural or religious practices, maybe not in place within christian institutions, such as segregation, critized so heavily and linked to issues that they do not deserve to be linked to?

I just don't get it. I thought we were moving forward in the way we report Muslim Australia. It seems we aren't. It's the same with the way Indigenous affairs is reported. Occasionally you get the odd writer who gets it right, but most of the time it's just white journalists passing judgement.