Tag: Zurairi Ar

Raising Children To Not Hate

Growing up in Kluang in the 90s, I never had much chance to go to the movies. I made up for my lack of cinema experience with VHS rentals; I would pass my father a list of sci-fi films and Japanese tokusatsu series to rent during school holidays.

Internet and film reviews were not as accessible as they are now, so determining age ratings and whether they were suitable for kids were mostly left to luck and the fast-forward button. Up until now, I still have not watched Lawnmower Man, Johnny Mnemonic, and Demolition Man.

But that was then. Nowadays, you can at least find out the age ratings of films through show lists in the papers. Those with access to the Internet can even find out exactly which scenes may not be appropriate for their children. As it is, film trailers already reveal much of the plot, sometimes too much.

Therefore, it is baffling why Malaysian censors still resort to the archaic practice of censorship, even after giving age ratings. What is the point of giving the highest rating of 18, when the film still ends up cut anyway?

The act itself reeks of masturbatory possessiveness: now that the censors have seen something they felt salacious, no way they would ever the let the public see it.

Alas, the public will — through pirated VCDs and torrent files, or even legal streaming services — still see what they want to see. In the age of Internet, censorship is moot save for satisfying your self-righteous ego.

It is as if they do not trust Malaysian parents to review which films are suitable for their children, and to have a family chat later explaining what puzzling things their kids may have seen. Because that is what responsible parents would do.

The problem, however, lies with many parents who have little to no care for their own children, outsourcing the responsibility instead to the nanny State. Which is how we ended up with the Beauty and the Beast fiasco.

There is nothing right with the Censorship Board’s decision to cut the so-called “gay moments”, even after slapping an age rating of 13 on the film. It is wrong not so much because it is not their job, it is wrong because it is blatant homophobia.

Let me put this in context: the “gay moment” was nothing obscene. Nobody had sex, nobody even kissed. According to the Board’s chairman Abdul Halim Abdul Hamid, it involved a song with Josh Gad’s character Le Fou, identified by the makers as a gay man.

“The way he dances is… gay and the dialogue and the lyrics of the song are too. In the same scene he also lifts up his shirt and shows a love bite on his tummy.

“Even I wanted to bring my grandchildren to watch it. But there are rules. We don’t support LGBT,” Abdul Halim told news agency AFP, proudly declaring his homophobia, as he made up this rule about Malaysia not supporting LGBT.

While Disney should be praised for its tough stance, I am not under the illusion it did so because of a pro-LGBT agenda.

It is first and foremost a company, and it puts its money where the market is. And the market nowadays yearns for diversity and inclusivity, which is why there was a black man in the 2015 Cinderella remake. And now a gay man.

But that is besides the point. Children should see gay characters in their films. They must be taught that gays exist, they are no different from heterosexuals, and should be treated the same.

The world is changing. The next generation is no longer chained to obsolete ideas still held by old men who would force their beliefs on others. And us parents must take up this challenge to keep up.

It warmed my heart to see a 15-year-old girl join the KL Women’s March last week. To be aware of feminism and women’s rights at such a young age, her parents did good. At 15 all I cared about were music and comics — the Kosovo War just flew right over my head.

There was a photo of her holding a placard saying she cannot become a prime minister, because all people care about is her lack of tudung, or headscarf. The irony was, she was then attacked online by both men and women who have stood so long in the shadow of patriarchy for not wearing tudung. For bothering with feminism. For even daring to dream to be a prime minister.

And that is the sad and terrifying state of our country right now, where women are being denied their rights, and when they speak up they just get kicked down again. As a parent and father, this is why I stand in solidarity with our fighting women, and why you should too.

Because what we are up against is decades of indoctrination by a patriarchal society that banks on religion to legitimise their dominance. And of course, religion itself is lending them more credence than they deserve.

Recently I participated in a forum organised by the MCA on the Bill to allow Shariah courts to impose harsher punishments. There, I had reminded the public of how our religious enforcers are oppressing our Muslim transgender citizens; just by stepping out of their doors, they are effectively committing a Shariah offence. Where is the dignity in that?

I got labelled an “LGBT supporter” instead, as if that was a bad thing.

But that is just because they are not aware, not bothering to understand that our understanding of gender and sex has advanced with science — that they are not binary between male and female, but rather a spectrum. It is much easier to let kids understand this.

As parents, we can try to rid the world of bigotry. And that starts by teaching our kids not to hate. And to respect, and accept everybody for who they are.

* This is the personal opinion of the columnist, Zurairi AR.

Source: www.themalaymailonline.com

March 20, 2017
Why “Creeping Islamisation” Is No Joke

If you were not bingeing on a TV show imagining a world where the Nazis had won, like I did, how did you spend your New Year’s Eve?

Did you spend it indoors with your loved ones? Or perhaps you were one of the revellers who danced the night away, pausing only to admire the fireworks?

Or maybe, seeking respite from the drizzle, you were planning to witness the countdown at the historic Dataran Merdeka? Only to bafflingly discover that the place was filled with thousands of men clad in robes and skullcaps chanting in Arabic?

It would be too easy to dismiss and mock critics who highlight the so-called “creeping Islamisation” in Malaysia. Especially those who cite the event — the recurring Malam Cinta Rasul, or Love the Prophet Night — as a pointed example.

After all, the notion of “creeping Islamisation” plays right into the narrative of anti-liberal reactionaries, who often speak of concerted attacks to undermine the position of Islam and the Malay race in this country.

For them, it evokes their favourite caricature of a hysterical Malay-hating Islamophobe strawman who would rant against anything tied to the two topics.

How could Islamisation creep up on you when Islam has been here for centuries? So, the argument could go.

Or they would conflate being Islamic and Islamised, claiming that many Muslims were happily drinking the night away on New Year’s Eve, among other vices.

Fact is, institutionalised Islamisation has been around for so many decades that even those who have not been completely indoctrinated, would have normalised the situation and can see nothing wrong.

Islamisation has less to do with people becoming more pious or religious, than it is with Islam permeating into institutions and spaces that used to be secular and have no religious value.

To the clueless, let me start the year right by painting a picture of Islamisation by using Malam Cinta Rasul as an example, and another “creeping faith” that haunts the dreams of paranoid clerics: Star Wars.

Malam Cinta Rasul might be optional, it is not mandatory for all Malaysians, let alone Muslims. Nonetheless, it has now been held on a grand scale annually since 2013 — mostly on New Year’s Eve — not counting several other events sharing the same name in other states.

This is only possible with backing from the state, and so it was. The event was organised by the Cheras Education Foundation, a foundation under Cheras Umno, led by influential grassroots chief Syed Ali Alhabshee.

And the foundation can afford to do so, when it is backed by the state itself. Co-partners included the Federal Territories (FT) Ministry, Communications and Multimedia Ministry, the Kuala Lumpur City Hall, and the FT Islamic Council.

Present as guests of honour at the event, complete with comfortable lounge seats, were Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, FT minister Tengku Adnan Mansor, Perak Mentri Besar Dr Zambry Kadir, KL Mayor Amin Nordin Abdul Aziz, and Syed Ali himself.

Essentially, this means Putrajaya has no qualms holding an event that costs hundreds of thousands ringgit (last year’s cost was roughly RM200,000), for something that panders exclusively to Muslims.

Doesn’t sound too ridiculous? Imagine then, Putrajaya co-organising a massive, costly Star Wars convention, and only Star Wars, year in year out.

Not to forget, the event was held in a public space, commonly associated with New Year’s Eve celebrations which was completely accessible to people of all backgrounds. Or at least it was, before 2013.

Drawing on the same analogy, this is akin to a Malaysian coming every week to his pasar malam spot, only to discover that suddenly the lot is used for a Star Warsscreening. For the next month, there has not been any pasar malam on that day of the week. Just Star Wars, week after week.

Unconsciously, the public is made to perceive that such an Islamic-themed events — regardless of its actual religiosity — is a norm, despite its relatively late introduction to Malaysia.

Not only that, by endorsing such an event, Putrajaya is promoting it as a “preferred” way to usher in the new year. Which spells good news for conservative killjoys who cannot stand others enjoying their non-Shariah-compliant celebrations.

Once secular, the new year has now been co-opted as a day to assert Islam’s dominance, by the many Malays who came in droves, over the rest of the public.

This, insidiously, carries repercussions beyond just ringing in the new year.

This endorsement of a seemingly Islamic way of life as the only “right” way for a Malay to live will result in an ugly divide and demonisation, especially when Malays have no way of shedding the “Muslim” label in the first place.

Left unchallenged, it would solidify the position of Islamic dogma as the basis of the country’s governance.

We see it in Islamic agencies Jakim and Yapeim’s impunity, even in the face of public uproar over its lack of transparency in handling funds.

We see it in the Langkawi homes where the roofs were painted over simply for resembling a cross at a certain angle.

We see it in the clergy wing of Islamist party PAS, suggesting that marrying children off is the best way to prevent sexual crimes.

We see it in Terengganu, which like some other states have banned vaping, but only after the National Fatwa Council deemed it “haram” for Muslims.

We see it in the civil court handing over the power of child custody in cases of forced Muslim conversions, to the Shariah courts. A decision which PAS Youth has proudly claimed as a “victory” against liberals, although it is more likely a trumping win against non-Muslims.

Yes, Malaysians are yet to turn more Islamic.

But slowly and bit by bit, unnoticed by most, there is a shift on imposing Islamist views on matters where religion previously had no place. That surely qualifies as creeping, and does not sound as funny.

* This is the personal opinion of the columnist, Zurairi AR.

Source: www.themalaymailonline.com

January 5, 2016
Bursting The Muslim Bubble

Malaysian Muslims in general tend to live in bubbles.

Due to their dietary requirements, they isolate themselves in a bubble so unnecessarily strict and complex that it is now a burgeoning industry of its own.

They need to live with constant reminders to pray, and daily break periods to fulfil those prayers.

They require to be judged on certain issues with laws of their own, with a separate legal system with separate judges and separate courts.

Sometimes, these bubbles are even carried overseas together with them, whenever they travel abroad.

Students tend to stick together to preserve the bubble, to protect them from the wicked world outside that wishes to entice them away.

When travelling in tours, they find it easier to stay in the bubble and repeat their daily routine instead of directly participating in different cultures.

At best, keeping themselves in these bubbles polarises non-Muslims as outcasts, and always as “the others.” At worst, by retreating further into their own shells, Muslims leave non-Muslims increasingly uncaring about their affairs, with both having fewer and fewer things in common.

Bigger problems, however, will inadvertently arise when Muslims try to expand these bubbles everywhere, and make others live inside these boundaries they have created for themselves.

Take the example of the do’s and dont’s of entertainment according to federal Islamic authorities Jakim, which is already in the second edition this year. If you think it only applies to Muslims, then you are far too hopeful.

We recognise that some Muslims have different attitudes towards entertainment. But even then, such an attitude is hardly shared among all Muslims in the country.

If that is the case, then why is Jakim being given the authority to draw umbrella guidelines for the industry, just based on the moral outlook of several clerics who sit in the fatwa committee?

The guidelines came only in one flavour: Islamic. The crowd must be segregated according to gender. Jokes must not lead to “excessive laughter.” Song lyrics must contain elements of “goodness and pure values.” Music should “motivate positive atmosphere.”

It was clearly a matter of the clergy class poking their nose into something it is essentially clueless about, and has no business regulating.

Under fire, Jakim then clarified that the guidelines were exactly that: guidelines. But that was the simple fact of the matter: Islamic authorities just cannot enforce those restrictions.

But Jakim’s defensive reply rang too hollow, when the hawkish Islamic authorities are infamous for overstepping their boundaries with zealotry, in more ways than one.

We know the drill all too well. As much as as Jakim wants to hide it, the guidelines themselves specified that any entertainment event must be referred to the authorities for guidance.

Especially after the furore involving a K-pop mini event, event organisers are just prey waiting to be wolfed down the moment they as much as sneeze in the wrong key.

If Jakim says the guidelines are not obligatory, then we must keep them to their words, and never back down.

After all, are fatwas not supposed to be nothing more than learned opinions? Instead, that is not how it is in Malaysia. As the bubble grows, what is right now is at the mercy and whims of the Muslim community.

Which brings us to the issue of the church in Taman Medan, that was forced to remove the cross from its facade by no more than an angry bunch of Malay-Muslims.

Under public criticism and mockery, Malay supremacists quickly jumped on the news that the church was deemed illegal by the local council.

Almost too conveniently, they quickly forgot the fact that the initial protest had nothing to do with legality, but laughably a stark fear that such public display of the Christian cross may affect the faith of the Muslim community.

The Malay-Muslim community in the area did not even try to hide that fact, with an interview by Malay Mail Online this week showing them admitting that they were genuinely afraid that Christianity might appeal to the locals, and how the cross was “provocative.”

Even after it was advised by state lawmakers to replace the cross, the church did not do so. The facade had stayed bare.

But this fear and cowardice is only too common. Two other houses of worship in the same area, another church and a Hindu temple, pride themselves on being discreet so as to not “offend” the Muslim locals.

Were they to blame? After all in 2013, Islamists Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma) complained that a RM10 million temple renovation jeopardised Malaysia’s “Islamic image.” Earlier this year, a Muslim consumers’ group complained of a picture of Batu Caves on mineral water bottles.

There is a reason why churches are being driven away to shoplots. Because when it becomes a free-standing structure, it may face even bigger protests from Muslims just for being “too huge.” Not to mention the possible hurdles it faces to get built in the first place.

Some Islamists just want to see religions other than Islam being reduced to the domain of homes.

Like Brunei, will we see public celebrations of Christmas and Chinese New Year disappear from the public space? Already, there are complaints that shopping malls are putting too much money and effort into grand celebrations of non-Muslim festivities.

While Islam might be the religion of the federation, does it give absolute impunity for Muslims to carelessly expand their bubbles at the cost of others? We should not let this illusion cow us. It falls on us to prick those bubbles.

* This is the personal opinion of the columnist, Zurairi Ar.

Source: www.themalaymailonline.com

April 27, 2015