Pakatan Rakyat / Politics in general

Teresa Kok’s double standards

Posted on by 23 Comments

I am amused with the article published in The Mole today. Specifically with what Teresa Kok had to say when asked by The Mole’s reporter.

It started when Haris Ibrahim wrote an article that had clearly shown PAS’ spiritual advisor, Nik Aziz at his worst. Haris suggested that people in general should not remain silent over Nik Aziz’s version of Islam in light of the recent issue on Hudud.

The damning video of Nik Aziz saying the words “Dah dia buka aurat. Dirogol. Padanlah muka dirogol. Dia jual murah-murah. Dia dok jual murah-murah. Betis dia, muka dia, peha dia. Rogol lah! Peduli apa? (She did not cover herself.  She got raped. Serves her right. She made herself cheap. She sells herself cheap. Her calves, her face, her thighs. Rape her! Who cares?)”

Here is the video. Nik Aziz’s shocking words can be heard from 4th minute onwards.

Quoting Haris;

“Everybody makes mistake and Nik Aziz had given some zany remarks before. Even the greatest of leaders make mistakes, so did Nik Aziz.”

“But to allow for that sort of thing (what Nik Aziz said)  to stand is troubling.”

Yes, Nik Aziz must not get away with it. Malaysia is known as a leading nation of woman’s rights and yet there are some politicians who think women are the source of all evil and he could get away with it scot free. In fact, he is still revered even by his DAP friends!

Teresa - Keeping her eyes wide open against any male chauvinism

Thus the source of my amusement. Teresa Kok as we know, the leading icon in defending women’s rights, could only muster a feeble response towards Nik Aziz’s callous remarks.

When contacted by The Mole, she answered –

“I certainly don’t agree with such views. However, I should say Nik Aziz hardly make such statement nowadays.”

Oh yes, Teresa Kok that we all know, who would march into Parliament, armed with a video clip of a naked Malay woman doing ear-squats in a police lock-up suddenly seemed to be very apologetic towards Nik Aziz.

Moreover, she sounded like defending Nik Aziz! Are we missing something here?

Teresa - "I cried like this when Nik Aziz said that. He hurt my feelings real bad but I will only demurely disagree to what he had said"

Instead of raging for an apology from Nik Aziz, or furiously urging Nik Aziz to retract his statement, Teresa Kok was rather gutless in facing him.

She further added,

“In Pakatan Rakyat, we agree to disagree. Anyone can come up with any opinion, but the PR coalition only implement policies base on consensus.”

Basically, in Pakatan Rakyat, Teresa Kok says it is okay to have double standards. It is indeed troubling to see Pakatan Rakyat allowing such remarks to stand.

Funnily enough, all the women rights movement leaders who are closely associated with Pakatan Rakyat are strangely quiet when Haris Ibrahim raised this issue 3 days ago.

I guess double standards and lack of dignity are the virtues permeating in the core being of all those in the Pakatan Rakyat. Even fence sitters will be hard pressed to refute this obvious defect.

Needless to say, the Hudud issue is tearing them apart as it is really a severe fundamental inter-party policy issue that has remained unresolved till this very day.

23 thoughts on “Teresa Kok’s double standards”

    • kalau dah sangap…tak kira tudung kah tak tudung kah..kasi hantam jugak…
      dah tak ingat Yang Pencipta sedang memerhatikan kita..

      Like

      Reply

  2. This 27th October 2011 marks the third anniversary of Aisha Ibrahim Dhuhulow’s death. The young girl’s life ended on October 27, 2008, in front of 1000 spectators who crowded the Kismayu stadium in Somalia to watch her stoned to death…

    Ini yang kita tidak mahu dan takut akan berlaku,
    apakah Aisha telah diberi pengadilan yang sewajarnya?

    Apa agaknya pendapat Tuan Guru Nik Aziz berkenaan kes ini?

    Kes aurat,
    Apa yang saya tafsirkan dari ucapan TGNA di atas, dia telah menjatuhkan hukuman terbuka terhadap mangsa2 rogol – “tidak tutup aurat, biarkan saja dia dirogol”. Apakah keadaan ini akan di ambil kira sekiranya mangsa rogol tampil hadapan dan menggadu nanti?

    PS:
    In Democratic Republic of Congo, 1,100 women are raped every day. (The 2011 Global Women’s Progress Report).

    Like

    Reply

  4. This is quite embarrassing considering the remarks came from an Islamic leader like Nik Aziz. I wonder if Nik Aziz is giving justification for male to rape women who does not cover themselves? So, if you see, sexy women, you can rape lah? Kalau Teresa kena rape pun no problem lah? Now, I wonder why she diam-diam? 😉

    Like

    Reply

  5. “Dah dia buka aurat. Dirogol. Padanlah muka dirogol. Dia jual murah-murah. Dia dok jual murah-murah. Betis dia, muka dia, peha dia. Rogol lah! Peduli apa?”

    JMD – I presume you are a Muslim. So what is your Islamic view about the above statement? Is it in accordance with islam and with the Prophet’s PBUH teachings?

    Like

    Reply

    • Dear Curious,

      I do not have an Islamic view but just an ordinary view of a human being who is also a Muslim. To me, it is up to the woman to wear whatever she wants. We can’t tell a non-Muslim girl to cover up according to what Islam dictates. Even if she is a Muslim, it will be between her and God. What is more important is the behavior of men looking at these women. A Muslim men should follow Nabi Yusuf a.s. in fighting temptations whereby eventhough a woman came on to him, he resisted her charms. Even if a naked woman is standing in front of a man, he should have enough ‘iman’ and good ‘akhlak’ to know that raping, or forcefully having pre-marital sex is sinful; not only in Islam, but in all other religions. I hope my view correlates with any other Islamic view. The guilty party of a rape is not the victim but the rapist. This vital factor eluded Nik Aziz apparently.

      Thank you.

      Like

      Reply

      • I partly agree but we have to understand the human psyhology/ Al-Quran before concluding.

        1st reference (Human psychology): In theory (be it from east or west) ‘Sex’ is a basic need for human, same as food, shelter etc. ‘Sex psyhologist’ found out that men sexual desires triggers by physical & visual while women by emotion / audible ) That’s why pornographic is more popular to men than women.

        2nd reference: Definition of ‘acceptable sexiness’ is differs from all culture. In fact, it differs for all male – scientiest does name this as ‘sexual disorders’ – some gets excited by long feet, some by looking at armpit (weird huh? but yes) But I concur that all men get excited by breast and some other part (you know which). Question is, how can we know and make a custom made regulation for this?

        3rd reference (Al-Quran) (Subjected to affirmation by the scholars), I have read that the women should cover their head and chest. (Chest is understandable but some muslim however goes beyond that by focusing on hair, which I don’t think men will get excited by it). I also read that men should guard what they they see (..merendahkan pandangan mereka) as one of the way.

        So from the above:

        1) Basic male sex drive will trigger if they see sexy women. We can’t change this as we can’t change the fact that women is aroused by emotions.

        This leave us with 2 options (As stated in the Al-Quran) a) Men to guard what they see b) women to guard what they show (It’s a fair share 50-50 between gender).

        2) In Islam, we divided our life to cater – Allah, ourself & the community. To illustrate this:

        Therefore 3 different consequences:
        a-To perform solat, they have to cover their bodies to respect Allah
        b- In public, we should respect them by proper attire
        c- no limitation when we’re alone.

        While we acknowledged their rights for women to wear anything they want, we should take into account the 1st reference and 2nd reference (for non muslim). If you want to debate about ‘acceptable sexiness”, it’s subjective but we can discuss in other topic – (naked is also acceptable in some countries, but how can we tell them it’s not acceptable by us?)

        So, my conlusion: Women to protect themselves by wearing properly (U tell me what is ‘properly’ by your standard) and men should guard what they see. It’s fair.

        Like

        Reply

        • Thank you for the comment.

          But the issue here is also about rape. It is certainly wrong to absolve men in rape cases and putting blame entirely on women, as alluded by Nik Aziz.

          Thank you.

          Like

          Reply

          • Ref: RAPE
            ………………On January 24, 2011 Constable Michael Sanguinetti spoke on crime prevention at a York University safety forum.[7] He said: “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.”

            The SlutWalk protest marches began on April 3, 2011, in Toronto, Canada, and became a movement of rallies across the world. Participants protest against explaining or excusing rape by referring to any aspect of a woman’s appearance…….wiki

            This issue is global not just affairs of Muslim women. Getting very interesting! There had been cases where not only wives get raped by their own husbands in the safety of their own bedrooms, even small kids are victims to those who are supposedly responsible for them. We read of cases even grandmothers (in their ’60s were raped – are you sure its because of the way these grannies dress?)

            The way women dress is only a small contribution. In my opinion, rapist are truly very sick, unhealthy and dangerous people and this is what society need to look into. Take off the “R” from the word RAPE… these human beings behave like APES..

            Cheers

            Like

            Reply

          • Dear JMD,

            I still hold my view that it’s 50:50 responsibility even in the rape case.

            Men will rape the weakest link of women (be it by circumstances, by physical build, by chance or etc) although they get excited by other women on the street (which didn’t cover their chest etc) / in the pornographic material (which they didn’t guard what they see)

            Our emphasize should be :
            1) Women to cover their physical
            2) Men to guard what they see

            On Nik Aziz, I’m sure it’s not entirely valid but it has some weights on women too (despite people on the west who blamed 100% on men and is letting women away with it)

            Like

            Reply

  8. Pandangan seperti Nik Aziz tu telah dilontarkan oleh salah seorang Pengarang Harakah bertahun dulu (early 90s) dalam satu rancangan temubual di TV. Sejak itu saya tekad tidak akan sokong PAS selagi pendapat itu tidak berubah. Terbukti dalam abad ke 21 ini pandangan PAS masih serupa… jumud..!!

    Like

    Reply

  9. I think the issue is what constitutes “menutup aurat”. The problem is there are differences in interpretation.

    On the one extreme is the Taliban interpretation – cover all parts of the female body even to the extent of inability to have a clear view a few yards ahead of you. On the other is wearing tight clothes, baring bosoms, see through dresses that invite rape.

    It depends on values, perceptions and norms of behaviour. In the Western sense, even being taunted by shapely bodies in skimpy bikinis does not invite rape. Because it’s the accepted norm to wear bikinis at the seaside or by the swimming pool. But don’t you dare do that among Taliban minded, seldom-mixing-with-girls fellas. They’ll come swimming even from far-away, long deemed uninhabited islands, to rape you on an isolated Pulau Tioman beach.

    But if Teresa Kok does the bikini thing in front of Nik Aziz, I wonder what the old man would say. Or do.

    Sori, JMD. I just don’t find those two fellows acceptable politically and wish to mengarut sikit at them this dull and gloomy Friday afternoon.

    Like

    Reply

  10. Here is food for thought, IF GOD INTENDED THAT YOU COVER-UP HE WOULD HAVE CREATED US WEARING CLOTHES !!! I did’nt intend god wearing clothes when he created us ! lol.

    Like

    Reply

    • This chipmunk’s logic is malfunctioning. He must be running aroung buck naked.

      Your God should have created you full-grown to save on the growing up years when you develop and learn and utilise your thinking faculties.

      Like

      Reply

    • Following that logic, if god intended that we eat food, god should created us with KFC, McD, Nasi Lemak and Teh Tarik where we were born. LOL

      Like

      Reply

  11. Pingback: PAS Above All & Haris is Chopped Tongueless « 書 政 shuzheng

  14. Pingback: Justifikasi Untuk Merogol? | Dulu Lain Sekarang Lain

Astound us with your intelligence!