Comments (13)
Share this article
Print this page
Email a friend
- RSS
- Today's Paper
- Subscribe
- beta 2.0
High: 26°C
Low: 12°C
Alerts
Heads you lose, tails we win
Why are their howls of protest over banning an Indian film in Pakistan? What’s the problem if our censor board...
The writer is a barrister and a public policy graduate from Harvard University mahreen.khan@tribune.com.pk
Why are their howls of protest over banning an Indian film in Pakistan? What’s the problem if our censor board deemed it unsuitable for public consumption via cinema release, just as the The Last Temptation of Christ was banned in Chile, Singapore, Philippines, Argentina, Mexico and censored in other countries, in keeping with the objections and sensitivities of Christians. In France, the film’s release was met with attacks on cinemas, including arson by a Christian group in which a number of cinema-goers were badly burned. To prevent such disorder, some countries banned the film.
Countries have the right to reject foreign material. If there is a potential for disruption to public order, especially in a country which is in a state of war such as ours, the ban is completely reasonable. We cannot afford to police such protests. It is fine to argue the merits of the decision but not to greet such restrictions with immediate ridicule. Certain people argue that every act of prohibition is inherently anti-democratic and un-workable. If so, then should pork not be banned in Muslim countries? What about alcohol, drugs and prostitution? The latter two are even banned in many Western countries. The argument that things need not be banned “as good people won’t indulge in them even if they are freely available” is a patently flawed argument. The vast majority of people are neither staunch abstainers nor addicts. They are susceptible to persuasion to “try” things out and the availability and accessibility factor plays a large part in whether they consume a product or avail a service. So “bans” do work by limiting access to the majority of people.
As to those who start hyper-ventilating as soon as anything in a Muslim country is restricted, many of them have fallen head first into a “Western liberal paradigm” which they have accepted as their holy grail. It obliges them to denigrate their own cultural and religious values in order to prove how “liberal and open-minded” they are. They become oblivious to the obvious double standards being employed to undermine Muslim social values and promote Western values in their place, under the disingenuous banner of “freedom”.
If Western countries feel something is counter-productive for their society, such as drugs, they make it illegal for the protection for ordinary citizens and promotion of a civilised society. If developing countries, especially Muslim ones, make something illegal, such as alcohol (which is also a drug), then it is labelled a “ban” which is inherently atavistic, autocratic and retrograde and any arguments for the public good are seen with suspicion or mocked. What about when Islamic countries allow more freedom to the individual than Western countries? If France bans the veil, it is promoting secular values, but if Turkey allows women the choice of wearing the headscarf, it’s an affront to civilised values and against women’s rights. Many Islamic countries allow polygamy but Western countries have criminalised it. If all parties are adults expressing free consent, then is it not an unwarranted restriction on personal freedom to ban it? If the same man and woman have illicit relations, that is neither a crime nor considered abhorrent by Western society. This reflects Western values which tolerate adultery but not polygamy despite the obvious detriment to their social fabric, as documented in numerous studies on the breakdown of family units. Islamic values view adultery as unacceptable yet Muslim countries don’t issue warnings or messages of concern to Western countries on their “intolerance of polygamous families”. So what right do Western countries have to reproach Muslim societies on the values they choose to live by?
When Islam is defamed, the Prophet (pbuh) is caricatured, Muslims are demonised and vilified — that is “freedom of speech”. But questioning any aspect of the Holocaust, even pursuant to historical research, is a crime punishable by imprisonment. The burqa is criminalised, minarets are banned and Muslim women are forcibly de-veiled, also in pursuit of freedom. Smell a double standard here? According to these rules, Muslims can never be right. Heads you lose, tails we win.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 24th, 2010.
Reader Comments (13)
Latest News
Aqib Javed may quit as Pakistan bowling coach
UAE media reports the veteran test player is likely to coach that country’s cricket team.
Domki family murder: SC orders Sindh IGP to arrest culprits by Feb 24
CJ Chaudhry expresses dissatisfaction with the progress made in investigations and arrests.
PTI will shoot drones down once in power: Imran Khan
If the PTI comes to power, it will free the people of Pakistan from US slavery, says PTI chairman.
Indian commerce minister on 'historic' visit to Pakistan, Feb 13
The main object of the three-day visit is to completely normalize trade ties between both countries.
Australia beat Sri Lanka by five runs in ODI
Man-of-the-match Michael Clarke top scored for the home side with 57 from 88 balls.
Recent Slideshows
More in Opinion
Where in the world is Osama?
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, redistributed or derived from.
Unless otherwise stated, all content is copyrighted © 2012 The Express Tribune News Network.
Technical feedback? webmaster@tribune.com.pk
Ask yourself whether we are an ISLAMIC nation or not for the ideals that the society have embraced in this nation are certainly not ISLAMIC. Dating, consuming alcohol, adultery, dancing, music and movies are in direct contradiction with our Muslim values and commandments. Bribery, charging interest or feeding on interest, all forms of social and moral corruption, etc have been condemned in Islam and yet they have become a part and parcel of our society. Murdering women in the name of honor or throwing acid on their faces is Un-Islamic and yet no one seems to care. Poor women are being raped and yet the police often refuse to register cases against them esp. if the crime is perpetrated by influential men. What sort of Islamic nation is this where the people have no access to justice?
Its strange that our media channels are busy showing indian movies. These movies depict indian culture and values. The question is do we want their values to spread amongst our people. This is a land of wannabees…we have nothing unique to offer…Recommend
I love you for the sake of Allah (SWT).Recommend
Wow,this article reads like the speech of any garden variety taliban
sympathiser.You’ve listed as perceived victimization all the “atrocities” being heaped on us by the “evil west”.
This article is a gift from heaven for all the perpetually in denial ppl,who blame the jews,cia,mossad,raw for everything that ails our country.They’ll read this & feel vindicated for all their conspiracy theories,their view of being under seige & attack from the western countries.Recommend
I think the matter of banning a controversial film is elaborated beautifully and discuss amicably. Here It looks that the misunderstanding of most of the people will now be resolved for the sake of Pakistan.
The need for today is the unity of our nation and we should not indulge ourselves in any nefarious practices that can provoke a conflict.
The second paragraph is the crux of the article where she has supported the domain of the countries and their existence.
Keep it up Mahreen, you have done a wonderful job.Recommend
dont know which article talha is talking about – this one doesnt mention anything “evil” about the west or anything about “atrocities”. It is an excellent, reasonable and well argued case for standing up for Muslim values and not feeling defensive or obliged to ape other value systems especially when they rationalise what’s good for them and when it doesn’t suit them they limit freedoms esp for Muslims.
people like Talha just want to label anyone who stands up for islam and Muslim countries as extremists and sympathisers. Stop the name calling and have a reasoned discussion instead.Recommend
Clever title – the West wins no matter what Muslims do because they set the rules and change them whenever they like. Let’s stop trying to please others and stick to our values. Really nicely written.Recommend
sorry mistake – i meant irfan not talha. irfan’s comments are just name calling and without any basis.Recommend
Mr Irfan is the one living in conspiracy theory land. Did you even read the article? The writer is a graduate of a top “western” university. Nowhere does she call the west any names – just points out the contradictions in their policies. And uses great examples to do it. Refreshing and informative. I liked it a lot.Recommend
I guess we need to take a pause before getting too emotional. I am a Muslim living in Ireland which is a deeply catholic society for the past 4 years. Before that, I lived all my life in Pakistan.
Firstly, two wrongs do not make a right. Therefore citing some illogical bans in the West does not justify similar actions by Muslim countries. Secondly, it will not be fair to put a label on the entire western world for the acts of a few. We need to accept that there are extremes on our side as well.
We have never considered the fact that in certain Muslim countries (such as Saudi Arabia) non-Muslims are denied of even building a place of worship (say a church) for themselves. If there is a fingerpointing on Muslim countries, we are quick to cite the example of tolerant Muslim countries (such as Turkey) in an attempt to project a better image of ours to the world. However, when it comes to the Swiss ban on minarets or the French ban on burqa, we staple the entire western world together. We consider to have discharged our obligation by condemning the continued killing of Christians in Pakistan while we become outrageously violent if we feel that anything happened in a Western country is against our rights.
The reality is that there are some good non-Muslim societies (as are some Muslim societies) and there are some not so good Muslim societies (as are some non-Muslim societies). We need not staple the entire lot together in making a point across.
It is also important to analyse the reason behind the recent actions of the Western countries (such as Switzerland and France). The question is: have we, the Muslims, projected the best image of our religion? Unfortunately the answer is in the negative. It is most important that we project the peaceful image of Islam and that we react strongly against the so-called Muslims who are continuously mutilating the image of our religion in such a way that the the rest of the world now sees us as a threat to their existence. The west-bashing is not going to help improve things.Recommend
Very well argued. I feel we are too self critical. Need to loosen up a bit. Not everything we do as a nation or even things done by the govt, need to be ridiculed and criticized scathingly. Banning this film may actually save a lot of mishaps. We have a right to make decisions that serve our unique interests. You can differ on the nature of decisions, but no need to declare the country an extreme gone case at the drop of a hat. Well done, Mehreen.Recommend
Oh god. Not another victim. Has anyone been able to come up with any good reason for the ban on the film? Especially considering that every other major Bollywood production is released anyway? The question remains – what’s wrong with this movie?Recommend
You are very persuasive, Mehreen Khan.
But I am least persuaded by the polygamy argument. It doesn’t take a sociology experiment to know that polygamous relationships are rarely consensual — just like many adult women live for years in severely abusive marriages with “consent”. Victims often feign their consent over domestic violence under pressure. Yet domestic violence is rightly criminalized. The polygamy ban is not about protecting the family unit or promoting civilized values in society. (You came up with those priorities, remember.) It is directly a matter of women’s rights.
(Unless polygamy also pertains to women. If you are so against double standards, you should lobby for polygamy both ways, with several husbands as well as several wives. I would be with you, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see many western audiences interested.)
Western societies will not criminalize adultery because personal freedom is important. The affected spouse has the right to exit the marriage. The family unit gets damaged, yes, but that is your priority, Mehreen Khan.Recommend
I can understand why Indian Films are not tolerated by certain Pakistanis. Movies showcase Indian Culture. But, according to the 2-Nation Theory the 2 countries have completely different cultures and are completely different in every aspect.
But, Pakistanis themselves have proven this wrong by watching Indian movies,TV shows,etc. We are not different and hence, 2 Nation Theory is disproved.
But, India being a Cultural juggernaut, there is no option. Pakistanis will continue to love India but its Islamists and Military will continue to hate it. That is the Irony of it all!Recommend