Sunday, January 09, 2011

Serial Racist Slanderer

Zizek, Violence:

For the Western Liberal there is also the problem of the brutal and vulgar anti-Semitic and anti-Christian caricatures that abound in the press and schoolbooks of Muslim countries. There is no respect here for other people and their religion - a respect that is demanded from the West. But there is little respect for their own people, either, as the case of a particular cleric exemplifies. In the autumn of 2006, Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, Australia's most senior Muslim cleric, caused a furore when, after a group of Muslim men had been jailed for gang rape, he said; "If you take uncovered meat and place it outside on the street...and the cats come and eat it...whose fault is it - the cats or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meatis the problem." The explosively provocative nature of this comparison between a woman who is not veiled and raw, uncovered meat distracted attention from another, much more surprising premise underlying al-Hilali's argument: if women are held responsible for the sexual conduct of men, does this not imply that men are totally helpless when faced with what they perceive as sexual temptation, that they are simply unable to resist it, that they are utterly in thrall to their sexual hunger, precisely like a cat when it sees raw meat? In contrast to this presumption of a complete lack of male responsibility for their own sexual conduct, the emphasis on public female eroticism in the West relies on the premise than men are capable of sexual restraint, that they are not blind slaves of their sexual drives.

The Australian.

The Age.

(But yes, agreed, that's enough of him.)


  1. I dunno if he's being racist here- Zizek's only repeating what the cleric said.

  2. Okay, on second thought I see your point: he's making a generalization.

  3. You will get hepititis unless you learn not to eat your own feces, Jenny.

  4. It's really really bad for you. Just sniff if you must but flush it. Do not ingest.

  5. You're still bitter I dared to disagree with you last time,eh?

  6. I mean, even Richard Seymour respectfully disagreed with her.

  7. Explain where is the slander here... And why did you put a fact in bold? Were you implying that a group of Muslim men was not jailed for gang-rape? But, you know... they were both Muslims and jailed for rape.

    I may have some serious reasoning flaws, so please - explain what you meant with this.

  8. Okay I can help you if you really don't understand.

    Let's go through the text first a few words at a time:

    "For the Western Liberal"

    can you identify the referent of "the Western Liberal"?

  9. I'm being serious and you pull a mocking holier-than-thou game on me?

  10. well...

    -you're not being serious

    - i actually am considerably holier than thou