"BMSD" or British Muslims for Secular Democracy was launched in spring 2008 with a set of hazy goals and nebulous aims. A trawl through its website reveals a great deal of marketing-speak about harmony, diversity and respect but how this actually translates into day to day action is anyone's guess.
The doublespeak that has been previously highlighted by UmmahPulse appears to be part of BMSD's institutional architecture, with Yasmin Alibhai-Brown blasting Muslims during the launch for receiving a "disproportionate amount of attention and funding" before her organisation trousered approximately £32,000 of government money.
It was not clear exactly what kind of beast BMSD was: not thoughtful enough for a think-tank, not grassroots enough for a lobby group. At its launch, one was left with the distinct impression that BMSD was going to join the multitude of other groups of talking heads that sought to speak on behalf of the mythical "silent majority" of Muslims, whilst promoting their own agenda, and any failures would quickly be put behind them by a quick name change and a glossy relaunch.
It seems, however, that the "true north" of this organisation has finally been revealed with the publication last month of its document, "Advice to Schools: Brief guidance for handling Muslim parental concern". The document was briefly mentioned at the launch in 2008 and has been put together by Ghayasuddin Siddiqui and Taj Hargey, and was edited by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown.
The document itself is a "boil in the bag" collection of stereotypes, misconceptions and tenuous correlations. It stands on the shaky premise that Muslim children should stop receiving "special attention" in school for any religious requirements because as soon as they cast off these mainly "cultural" accoutrements, they will concurrently step out of the mire of educational underachievement and become high achieving individuals in the warm embrace of secularism.
The title of the document itself reveals what the agenda is here: "handling". Despite much padding about "fostering respect" and "creating environments of mutual understanding", there is only one reason this document has been produced and that is to give teachers the know-how needed to argue and bat away any requests from Muslim parents wishing to become involved with their own child's education.
The writers have divided "parental concerns" into 11 areas. Some of these are complete non-issues such as taking a day off for Eid; others give schools a broad hint that they must monitor Muslim pupils so as to advocate for them against their oppressive parents; and others take such a completely un-Islamic stance that one remains aghast that any organisation with "Muslim" in the title could possibly have written this document.
Then there is the sweeping statement that Hindu and Sikh students are doing better than Muslim ones as "they are better able to balance their particular ethnic identities with the Britishness that is their birthright". It is not often that one sees such a superficial reading of a complex issue offered by people supposedly so concerned with education. There is no mention of social deprivation, nor is there any offering up of statistics that may shed further light on the issue - such as the revealing statistic that being eligible for free school meals is more indicative of poor educational achievement than any ethnic or religious branding. It also ignores recent improvements in the educational achievements of students from Bengali backgrounds despite a concurrent increase in religious practice by Muslims of all ages that has been widely reported throughout the UK.
The stupidity of this blanket statement is revealed when one realises that the group with the worst educational achievement is white working class boys. Perhaps they too are having trouble with their ethnic identity?
This is the sort of brain numbing logic that gives rise to statements such as: my chair has four legs, my cat has four legs, therefore my chair is a cat. As a former board member of the Runnymede Trust, one would have expected BMSD's vice chair, Nasreen Rehman, to be familiar with the Trust's report, "Black and Ethnic Minority Young People and Educational Disadvantage". This contained a number of revealing insights, among them that certain ethnic minorities are more likely to come from socio-economic groups that will increase their disadvantage.
The Hijab
After such a shaky opening, the first issue to be "handled" is (what else?) female dress. Whilst the document shies away from directly calling for a hijab ban (despite the public support of the chair of BMSD, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, and Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, of France's hijab ban in schools), it takes great pains to let the reader know that the hijab is a mere cultural condiment rather than a religious requirement.
Nowhere in the "guidance" is it stated that, according to the vast majority of Muslim scholars, covering the hair is mandatory for post-pubescent females. Those who disagree number only a handful within the last 1,400 years of Islam. Instead of the truth, we are served up statements like "these females have gone back to the texts and realised for themselves that it is not required for them to cover their hair or faces".
The document also states that women may be forced to wear the hijab, thus giving schools the broad hint that any hijab-wearing student should be monitored for evidence of parental oppression. This will inevitably leave teenage Muslim girls in the situation where their non-Muslim teachers will be able to lecture them on their hijab being entirely un-Islamic and ask whether the girls are sure their parents are not oppressing them. All the while, they are waving around an official-looking document from a "Muslim" organisation to give them added credibility.
The Arts
In relation to the arts, hidden in a rambling treatise on how all creativity is a divine blessing and how nasheeds are widely accepted, is the "guidance" on what to do if a parent refuses to allow their child to visit an art gallery with nudes on display: "There is no reason at all to capitulate to parents who demand that their child be excused on the grounds of morality... Ignorance is not an option."
Would this non-negotiability also extend to works by contemporary artists like Tracey Emin, the Chapman brothers or Gilbert & George? Their award-winning modern "classics" on display at Tate Modern include "artwork" graphically depicting sexual acts as well as those made with urine, faeces, semen and menstrual fluid. I personally would want the option to maintain my children's ignorance of these disgusting acts, notwithstanding anyone's hollow claim that I am preventing their horizons being broadened.
Sex Education
After expending much time and energy going on about how hijab has no basis in the Quran (despite this being untrue), BMSD do an about turn and justify its acceptance of sex education by misquoting the hadith that "there is no shame talking about sex".
I am sure that the Prophet (peace and blessing be upon him) in no way meant the excruciating, politically correct discussions forced upon students by teachers, who have in reality no remit to dispense any sort of moral guidance to students, whether this be in the context of discussing homosexuality or the perverse “Lets Grow with Nisha and Joe” comic book-style sex education pamphlet, which comes complete with pictures of naked children and instructions to draw lines between their cartoon genitalia and the appropriate words. All this is designed for use with 6 year olds.
It is worth remembering that the UK has suffered from an explosion in the rates of sexually transmitted disease and unwanted pregnancies, both of which have disproportionately affected the youth. This rise has been concurrent with the government strategy to increase the amount of sex education and lower the age from which it is taught. Whilst I am not suggesting a naively simplistic "complete cause and effect relationship" between the two (other societal factors like the media contribute as well), it is certainly clear that sex education is not a magic panacea to cure society's ills. Sex education is also not just a physiological run through of the changes that occur with puberty but rather a forum that permits and encourages the discussion of sex before marriage and same sex relationships without the necessary moral compass or guidance offered to impressionable young people.
Friday Prayers
Bearing in mind that attending Jumah prayers is incumbent on every post-pubescent Muslim male, it seems utterly bizarre that an organisation with the word Muslim in its title should seem so against Friday prayers. BMSD explicitly instructs schools "not [to] yield to the following parental demands" which they list as:
- Allowing pupils to attend Friday prayers at a local mosque
- Setting aside a dedicated room for Friday prayers
- Permitting an outside imam to lead Friday prayers
BMSD's bizarre reaction to congregational prayers can be better understood when one realises that one of the co-authors of the document, Taj Hargey, carries out what he describes as Friday Prayers in a church hall in Oxford. Totally against the consensus of Muslim opinion, Hargey invited a woman to lead a mixed congregation in prayer and has in the past invited Christian priests to give the khutbah. From these actions, one can surmise the amount of respect he has for Jumah prayers.
After reading this document one could say, "Obviously this is crazy. Who would possibly adopt this guidance? And anyway, I have a good relationship with my child's school."
The risk, however, lies in the marketing of this booklet to schools. They may mistakenly give it the respect of being some sort of diversity training and feel that the document has come directly from the Muslim community and has been written with the backing of the majority. A further complicating factor is the document's cunning mix of the blindingly obvious with the utterly heretical. This may mislead head teachers into thinking that to force students to participate in sex education or forgo their Friday prayers or to badger them about their hijab is as important as protecting them from forced marriage.
Making an ill-equipped child justify and debate their religion with an authority figure such as a teacher or headmaster, who has the false credibility provided by a "guidance paper" written by "Islamic theologians" (by which I can only imagine BMSD means the "snake-oil salesman" Taj Hargey), is utterly cruel. It will cause most teenagers to become overwhelmed and may eventually lead to them resenting both their religion and their parents.
One can see that the real intention behind the document is not to promote education but to undermine the authority of Muslim parents and isolate them from the schooling process. BMSD states that "some parents see the school as culpable for their children's behaviour and refuse to recognise their own role and specific responsibility". This accusatory statement is then followed up by ten pages of very specific advice to teachers on how to stymie any requests for religious allowances made by parents who, by the very fact they are engaging with the school, are obviously fully aware of their role and responsibility.
It simply beggars belief that this motley crew, at odds with the vast majority of Muslims in the UK, sees fit to produce "guidance" on how schools should "handle" Muslim parents.
BMSD’s delusional claim that it represents the silent majority of Muslims is laughable until one sees the contempt this organisation has for those Muslims it claims to represent.
The real purpose of these stipulations and rules is to isolate Muslim parents from the education of their offspring, debase and demean them in the eyes of their children (who will quickly realise that their parents have no power against the all-powerful school) and promote ill-informed stereotypes in the minds of teachers.
BMSD has simply gone too far this time. When the welfare of our children is at risk, this organisation's activities should not be ignored.
Its website says that there are three school districts across the country which are piloting the use of the booklet. I call on BMSD to reveal which ones they are and to allow some daylight into the process.
It is up to the Muslims of Britain, whether parents, grandparents, older siblings, aunts or uncles, to make it their business to see if their local school has been contacted by BMSD about this document.
It is imperative that Muslim parents become proactive about speaking to their school and letting them know the truth: that BMSD is a group on the lunatic fringe, with no support base among mainstream Muslims, which seeks to foist its own aberrant religious beliefs onto the mainstream.
Hardworking and sincere school teachers and heads will not want to destroy the good working relationships they have built up over years with their Muslim communities. Insha'Allah they will realise that adopting the document's "guidance" (never was there a more ironic use of a word!) will only marginalise and cause widespread resentment and mistrust amongst their Muslim students and parents.
BMSD was best ignored when it released press statements that no one read, or held conferences that only a few attended. However, when they seek to break the sacred bond that parents have with their children, they have now crossed a bridge too far.
Thanks for posting this! I hadn't seen that piece by BMSD before but now you've mentioned it I'll certainly be heading over to their website to read, as it looks great!
ReplyDelete