At the risk of being called a person who discriminates, I chose to write this article anyway. I was watching a talk show earlier on tv2 and the panel were discussing ‘mak nyahs’. It was difficult to identify with the contents as out of the four panels present, three were pro mak nyah. Even the host was leaning towards the mak nyah community. I am for human rights, but I draw the line when someone is trying to ‘tegakkan benang yang basah’. It’s like sleeping around and justifying it by saying that my feelings won’t get satisfied if I were to stick to one person, so in a nutshell that makes what I'm doing right. Basically this is the way the mak nyah argument has been going, not just recently but from way back then. All they’re trying to do is to straighten something that will bend eventually. One panel even went so far as to say that gender is ‘flexible’. What on earth does that mean? Gender is not flexible, to my understanding, unless you were born with 2 sets of genitals or an indefinable one, then your gender is definitely not flexible. It is nurture then that plays a pivotal role in the course of a person’s life. Yes certain aspects of a person’s life are predestined, I suppose. I mean I am not really sure of the religious aspect regarding nature vs nurture, but what I do understand is that Islam has made it wrong for a man to impersonate a woman and vice versa. Why then are this people arguing for the mak nyahs? Why are the human rights activists fighting for them? Doesn’t this mean encouraging something which is wrong? It’s like advocating for a Muslim’s right to drink liquor. If I were to fight for drinking, then I will be shunned, because I’m a Muslim. But what about the activists who are fighting for the rights of these mak nyahs to be accepted in normal society like any other man and woman? If today we say okay to mak nyah, then tomorrow we will be advocating gay rights and before you know it, people in this country will start fighting for same-sex marriage. Where does it end? The mak nyah problem is only a problem because as a society we are not doing what we should do to discourage such behaviour.
All this said, I am not one who will smirk at a mak nyah when I pass them on the street. I am still a civil person. If a person smiles at me, I will smile back. If a person says hello, I will return the greeting. And it doesn’t matter if the person is male, female or otherwise. But I am sorry, I do not condone this sort of behaviour. I am not the embodiment of all things good, I am a mere human being, I make my mistakes, I am not perfect and it is definitely not in my place to judge another human being. However, I do not agree with what the mak nyahs are fighting for. For example, if a person wants to do something wrong and their faculties are intact and they can judge what’s good and evil and they still chose to do evil, and they don’t justify their wrongdoings, then they can do whatever they want, so long as they realize the consequences their actions will entail. But the problem with the mak nyah community here is that they are trying to justify what they’re doing. For example, if I drink, and I start to say that drinking is fine and there’s nothing wrong with it. Now that’s just wrong. But if I drink and I don’t say anything and I realize that what I’m doing is wrong and I don’t go about preaching that drinking is right, then fine. Same goes for these mak nyahs. If they want to become women, go ahead. So long as you are aware of the consequences. Otherwise it is up to the society to educate them. It is when they start to preach about equality and human rights that it starts to really irk me.
Am I being completely unreasonable? I hope not. I may not be a super staunch Muslim, there are things that I still need to learn and improve myself with, but when something is blatantly wrong, then it is wrong. There is no sense in justifying it. If we were to do that, then we are merely contributing towards the downfall of our own society. We are living in a Muslim country, where drinking, drugs and free sex are wrong and frowned upon. But how come we have human rights activists in this country advocating for something which has been clearly stated in the Quran as wrong? I apologize if this posting is stepping on some toes. I’m merely stating what I think should be the obvious.
2 comments:
There seems to be value in the wellfare of human beings. Absence of pain for one's self and others, promotion of love and understanding for all -- these could be viewed as different forms of "right".
When discussing issues regarding same-sex couples, one common counter-argument that often arises is the generalization that people, upon thinking about same-sex couples, rush think about how these couples would procreate (genitals involved) and spend their most intimate time together. They often disregard the fact that intimacy manifests itself on different levels (a touch, a glance of joy, friendship, comfort during sadness, companionship, understanding complicated feelings, etc.). What a generalization!
You were strongly against people who slept around and attempted to justify their actions. Ah, you are against promiscuity. That does conflict with the notion of absence of pain for others. Sleeping around can lead to infidelity and distress. Promiscuity can be viewed as "wrong".
But how does promiscuity tie in with trans/homosexuals? Do most trans/homosexuals lead promiscuous lives? Doubtful. Sure, there are always a few bad apples in any community.. let alone the trans/homosexual communities having their bad apples amplifying their already stigmatized predicament.
I like to think human-right activists do what they do.. for humans, first and foremost. They would fight for every last trans/homosexual, bad apples included.. every child of a war-torn nation, as well as children from a war-mongering nation. Ideally, no exceptions - dare I say, not even religion should get in the way.
I don't intend to say what you or anyone else should believe in. But I can point out that if you are faced with a situation where you are significantly irked by someone else, it may help to separate the annoying trait (that shadows the inherent value of a fellow human being) from the person.
This is very difficult to do and may involve painful self-question. But I believe the resulting reward is enlightened understanding and tolerance for things neutral that have been prematurely dismissed as "wrong".
Just my perspective :)
again thank you for the comment. i was not tying promiscuity to transsexuals. I was merely using an example of justifying the wrong for right. in this posting, i was speaking strictly from the context of religion (Islam) and not of social tolerance. i am just against people justifying their wrongful actions. it's just that in the case of transsexuals, it has been stated clearly in the Quran that it's wrong. So that is what I based this posting on.
Thanks for your insight. May I ask, who are you? And how did you come across my blog? I really appreciate the fact that you're taking time to read my ramblings.
Keep on reading, and I'll keep on posting. :-)
Post a Comment