“Bocor” scandal – spread of culture of impunity

All Ministers and Barisan Nasional (BN) MPs should digest the statement of the European Commission Ambassador to Malaysia, Thierry Rommel that there is no proper closure of the sexist “bocor” outrage in Parliament by two Barisan Nasional (BN) MPs, Datuk Mohd Said Yusuf (Jasin) and Datuk Bung Mohtar Radin (Kinabatangan) and that it is most damaging to Malaysia’s international reputation.

In a letter to Malaysiakini yesterday, Thierry wrote:

I would wish to convey a third party opinion, prodded by internal discussions, on the possible effects of sexist remarks made by prominent Malaysian citizens on Malaysia’s international reputation.

The short answer to this pertinent question is yes, for a number of reasons.

It is a violation of the spirit of the Universal Human Rights Declaration more so coming from persons who are in a position of influence and power.

Malaysia is a member of the UN Human Rights Commission, further raising expectations of exemplary and ambitious approach to upholding human rights, including gender equality, and fundamental freedoms.

Finally, such remarks have a far greater and adverse impact than some people in position of power care to admit. Witnessing moreover the impunity that has accompanied such remarks, astonishment and disbelief prevail.

This is one further example rebutting the answer by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz to my question in Parliament on Tuesday that the Cabinet regards the “bocor” scandal involving Mohd Said and Bung Mohtar as settled is wrong, ill-advised as well as completely unsatisfactory and unacceptable.

The issue of the need for a satisfactory and proper resolution of the “bocor” parliamentary scandal precipitated by the crude, vulgar, sexist and gender-insensitive conduct of the two BN MPs, which must include at minimum a contrite and genuine apology by the two MPs to DAP MP for Batu Gajah Fong Po Kuan in Parliament, is necessary not only to protect the good image of Parliament and the international reputation of the country, but to send out a clear message that the era of a culture of impunity for wrongdoers among top Barisan Nasional leaders has ended.

We see around the country government leaders, whether at Cabinet, parliamentary or government level, committing all sorts of wrongs and misdeeds, including corruption and abuses of power, being able to get away scot-free because of the stifling and most undesirable culture of impunity, where wrongdoers are not punished or do not have to admit wrong with public apology.

So long as such a culture of impunity is allowed to flourish, Malaysia will never succeed to become a “First-World Infrastructure, First-World mentality” developed nation but will be condemned to “Third-World Infrastructure, Fourth-Class Mentality and Ninth-Class Maintenance” — and there are more and more recent indications that the country is heading in this direction.

  1. #1 by Winston on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 3:22 pm

    Well done, Uncle Lim!
    Now, the BN ministers will find it difficult to show their faces when they go overseas whether on official business or on holidays.
    They may even look stupid when foreign officials query them about the uncouth behaviour of their members of Parliament and the connivance of the government.

  2. #2 by sotong on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 3:43 pm

    These Ministers and MPs do not fully understand the enormous consequence of their actions.

    Our country is really in deep shit!

  3. #3 by Educator on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 3:44 pm

    Winston, you are wrong. Our ministers will never feel ashamed or embarrassed. They just don’t know how!

  4. #4 by sotong on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 4:07 pm

    They don’t give a shit because they are confident their positions are not and will not be affected.

    They are trying very hard to give the people the impression that every is fine but deep inside they are lost, confused and don’t know what to do in the best interest of the country…..like a duckling swimming in the lake…at the top it looks calm but at the bottom…..it is paddling like mad.

    The ordinary must get involve to protect the country and their future generations, including protection of the unique bumi culture and traditions.

  5. #5 by justiciary on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 5:39 pm

    Seemingly we can’t do anything as yet because ‘some’ people have skin that is as thick as a rogue elephant.Moreover they still syiok sendiri oblivious of what is happening around the globe.They are still sticking to their culture of ‘seperti katak di bawah tempurung’.

  6. #6 by pwcheng on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 6:02 pm

    Generally our MPs, especially those from the BNs and from the countryside had “bocor” mentality. They are still thousand of miles away from being modern and suave. They talk like cavemen, behave like one and also resemble like one. They do not have the ability to control their behavior and speech as their brains are somewhat dysfunctional and what flies out from their mouth do not have control of the brain.

  7. #7 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 6:17 pm

    “In a written reply in the Dewan Rakyat yesterday, Nazri said the incident had not damaged Malaysia’s reputation.” NST

    There is a difference between saying incidents of that nature have put Malaysia’s Parliamentary proceedings in a bad light, and saying he believes incidents such as those have not.

    “We are confident that the people and the international community are mature enough to differentiate between remarks by two individuals and a systemic problem of sexism,” he said.” NST

    On this one I think you got to give it to him.

    On the EEC’s Head of the European Delegation to Malaysia’s remarks on the issue of sexism in Malaysia’s Parliament:

    “It is a violation of the spirit of the Universal Human Rights Declaration more so coming from persons who are in a position of influence and power.”

    This is stating the obvious and is in fact a very mild statement to make in view of the following:

    Malaysia may be a member of the United Nations Human Rights Commission but it has not adhered to the terms of the agreement. It has repressive laws to suppress the free expression of public opinion and some of the issues concern human rights and should be seen as such.

    The latest decision by the country’s highest court has once again denied a citizen of her right to exercise freedom of choice over her religion. This is a human rights issue and Lina Joy is now technically a refugee fighting persecution and prosecution in her own country and is entitled to the protection of the UN 1967 Protocol relating to Refugees of which Malaysia is not a signatory, should she so chooses. So far she does not appear to have. That too is her choice.

    Further the Head of the European Delegation writes:

    “Malaysia is a member of the UN Human Rights Commission, further raising expectations of exemplary and ambitious approach to upholding human rights, including gender equality, and fundamental freedoms. ”

    It seems misguided to look to Malaysia, a third world country struggling with basic issues on freedom, democracy and human rights for an exemplary behavior of anything. Sexism and gender equality pales in comparison to racism and the oppression of the country’s minorities which Malaysia’s ruling elite has been guilty of.

    Talking about the prevalence of sexist attitude and behavior among Malaysia’s ruling elite, for example, and not just the two errant Members of Parliament, and not addressing at the same time the recent incident, for example, in the State of Georgia’s Senate in the United States involving Senators slugging it out on the floor of the Senate for the whole world to see, seems rather unfair and unbalanced.

    The atmosphere in Malaysia’s Parliament is akin to a circus like atmosphere despite its five decades of history. This is something that we should be ashamed of. But credit must go to the MPs (government and opposition alike) for not slugging it out on the floor of Parliament to try and resolve the issues. Incidents of this nature have not only marred the proceedings of the legislatures of third world countries but also developed countries like United States and European countries.

    The time, in my opinion, has come to ask ourselves if our constant reference to the ill-mannered and disrespectful behavior of some of our MPs serves any useful purpose – other than to focus world attention to the state of our parliamentary proceedings. It is one thing for the international community to want to make Malaysia a laughing stock of the world for its failures but it is another when Malaysians themselves and their leaders invite criticism from the rest of the world.

  8. #8 by pongsakling on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 6:24 pm

    The two monkeys who use the word “bocor” are malay,
    and this word use to insult DAP Fong, who are chinese,
    and now Nazri, who are malay will surely defend his own race malay, this case is as simple as this.
    Ketuanan melayu, as a ketuanan, they can insult any one as they like. So what? If Chinese try to make more noise, they will take out their kris again to threaten the chinese! And our traitor MCA and Gerakan will tell the chinese again, complain to proper channel or behind close door and close window, so nobody know what they discuss accept their master umno and the two traitor MCA and Gerakan! Then the case close! So simple!

  9. #9 by Loh on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 8:44 pm

    ///It is one thing for the international community to want to make Malaysia a laughing stock of the world for its failures but it is another when Malaysians themselves and their leaders invite criticism from the rest of the world.///

    There is a difference between Malaysians inviting criticism from the rest of the world, and Malaysians in position of power making a fool of themselves, and thus cause criticisms to be levelled against them.

  10. #10 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 9:57 pm

    True. But they are not doing it now. It is the Opposition who continues to draw world attention to the issue. Sexism is the least of our problems. The Opposition can continue to make political capital out of it but what about our larger interest as Malaysians? Let it not be at the expense of the country’s reputation within the international community.

    As another reader Godfather says. “It is time to let it go”.

    There are lots more serious issues like the genocide in Darfur where 1.8 million died over a 20 year period, where each month 50,000 people are displaced etc.

    The world has turned its back on Darfur. What has Malaysia done to pressure the United States to take action to stop the genocide?

    Human trafficking is another. Malaysia has been criticized for not doing enough to stop human trafficking and she has been relegated to the bottom Tier 3 sharing a place with the worst among countries which benefit from human trafficking. Even Thailand and Indonesia with their widespread use of child labor in its factories are doing better than Malaysia.

  11. #11 by ihavesomethingtosay on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 10:01 pm

    “Out of my way!” says the new pig in town.

    Squealer, a small fat porker, serves as Napoleon’s public speaker. Squealer twists and abuses the language to excuse, justify, and extol all of Napoleon’s actions.

    From “The Animal Farm” by George Orwell.


  12. #12 by joehancl on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 10:13 pm

    What do you expect from 3rd class mentality govt.?

  13. #13 by Winston on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 10:53 pm

    # Educator Says:
    June 21st, 2007 at 15: 44.03

    “Winston, you are wrong. Our ministers will never feel ashamed or embarrassed. They just don’t know how!”

    Educator, let me put it this way.
    Let’s compare the two offending BN MPs to someone sitting in a bullet proof car.
    They may think that they’re very safe but what they don’t know is that the glass of such a car can only withstand being hit on the same spot for only so long.
    If the marksman keeps shooting at the same spot, the glass will eventually break.
    Also, not all Malays or UMNO members may side with these two. Many of them may also be cheesed off by them.
    On the other hand, if Uncle Lim takes the matter lightly and just offer some perfunctory criticisms, they may think that it is indeed a small matter and will be further emboldened.
    I think that one should not harbour any self defeatist thoughts if one were to be able to overcome obstacles.
    Just trust Uncle Lim, there’s no better sharp shooter than he!

  14. #14 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 11:26 pm

    “Sexism is the least of our problems” – Undergrad2

    The central question raised is that there are all kinds of discriminations going on in Malaysia – race, religion, gender but in the hierarchy of priorities, there’s such a big brouhaha and hullabaloo over gender discrimination, including international attention, that it is almost as if racial and religious discriminations are less important than gender discrimination, when as a matter of value judgment, I think racial and religious discriminations together with the problem of corruption are actually more important problems faced by the nation than sexist remarks or behaviour.

    Of course racism, religious parochialism, male patriarchal chauvinism are all part of the culture thing but which in scale of priorities deserve greater outrage and fuss? That’s the question.

    First, what does “sexist” mean? It usually is taken to mean (a) discrimination based on gender, usually but necessarily directed against women – for with insertion of the word ‘gender’ in article 8 of our constitution, a woman too could equally be guilty of making sexist remarks or behaving sexist way against men – and (b) beliefs and behaviours promoting stereotyping of social rules based on gender.

    Now why do we condemn sexist “bochor” remarks of Mohd Said Yusuf (Jasin) and Bung Mohtar to the extent of getting international involvement more than racist remarks as when (say) MP from Jerai Badruddin Amiruldin, brandished a book on the May 13 or Hishamuddin, a keris Incident during an UMNO General Assembly?

    Can we justify it upon the fact that we’re trying to be a gender sensitive society – if so why do we seek to make such ambitious claims (especially when cultural attitudes take time to change)?

    An example of inconsistency : Take the case of PAS which together with DAP and Parti Keadilan Rakyat, handed over a memorandum to minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil calling for an end to sexism in Parliament over the ‘bochor’ remarks, with PAS forgetting:-

    · Sometime back PAS Spiritual advisor Dato Nik Aziz said women’s revealing dressing invited rape; Abdul Fatah Harun (PAS – Rantau Panjang) said women divorcees are gatal (randy); and

    · Dr Mohd Hayati Othman (PAS Pendang), Salahuddin Ayub (PAS Kubang Kerian) MPs claimed that the Malaysia Airlines female cabin staff’s “sexy uniform” would arouse the sexual desires of male passengers….

    Why do we condemn BN’s MPs sexist statement more than sexist statements from PAS’s politicians?

    Also why do we condemn sexist remarks and not sexist actions like PAS’s government continuing with its policy of gender segregation at supermarkets and concerts (a sexist act and policy)?

    Is Religion a complete defence to arrangements which would be otherwise termed as ‘sexist’ – like for example polygamy?

    Are we not sexist when we marginalize look down and ostracize subaltern groupings of lesbians, homosexuals, gays, transsexuals and travestites based on their gender preferences?

    PAS and some conservative BN politicians have even pressed for advertisements especially bill board showing a model women’s scantily clad form taken down : are they sexist or are we by putting up these advertisements?

    Article 8(2) of our Constitution now prohibits discrimination against any citizen of Malaysia on the grounds of gender : so a woman too cannot make sexist remarks and behave in sexist manner against men but do we overlook the sexist remarks women make?

    Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun suggested once that men were to blame for the high number of women who remained spinsters. “There would be fewer single women if men were willing to marry women who were more educated and earning higher salaries.” Is this not a sexist remark by her against men insinuating they are stupid or what?

    MCA women’s chief Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen led the campaign against Chinese nationals on grounds that these ‘dragon ladies’ if allowed to come in as maids tourists, workers or students would wreck families by having affairs with the husbands. “There is distrust of Chinese nationals among the local Chinese community following the many broken marriages, DAP Member of Parliament Teresa Kok was quoted as saying.

    This is a damning indictment on Malaysian Chinese males – the insinuation being Malaysian men cannot be trusted, and left on their own to interface with mainland Chinese women – and also Chinese women who are supposedly all out to get our men and their money under the guise of working or studying here : aren’t these allegations sexist that drew no condemnation?

    And what about our laws that are sexist against men – for example the laws on child custody in a divorce and presumption that the children of 7 year old are better off with the mother than the father regardless of matrimonial fault?

    If we are so concerned with sexism in our society why aren’t we addressing all these issues as well besides the bochor remarks ?

  15. #15 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Thursday, 21 June 2007 - 11:59 pm

    Undergrad2 says:
    “Sexism is the least of our problems. The Opposition can continue to make political capital out of it but what about our larger interest as Malaysians? Let it not be at the expense of the country’s reputation within the international community.

    As another reader Godfather says. “It is time to let it go”.

    THe international community has only a fleeting interest in our stand on sexism and so many other issues. The world has no time to stop and stare at the stupidity of some nations or to engage with their clowns. If Malaysia chooses to be so blatantly stupid….well, the ‘pleasure’ is always Malaysia’s.

    As to the statement that ‘sexism is the least of our problems’…with respect, I disagree. If the issue is limited to just 2 idiotic MPs, it may not be so hemorrhagic to our national reputation but more so, to the fabric of our society and the governance. However, besides Bung and Mohd Said, there was also Aziz and several other MPs who made stupidly mindless sexist remarks on different occasions which confirm that these MPs have no sense on the propriety of their remarks nor any appreciation of the dignity of women, their place and contributions to society.

    Thus, YB Kit is right in pursuing the matter to its logical conclusion, to extract some form of positive recognition of the widespread malaise and depraved mindset amongst some key members of BN and to seek some form of change. Shahrizat and Ng Yen Yen are dumb representatives for women’s rights! They are famously sweet when it’s time for photo-opps but quite dumb on matters of real significance.

  16. #16 by undergrad2 on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 1:06 am

    “Thus, YB Kit is right in pursuing the matter to its logical conclusion, to extract some form of positive recognition of the widespread malaise and depraved mindset amongst some key members of BN and to seek some form of change. Shahrizat and Ng Yen Yen are dumb representatives for women’s rights! They are famously sweet when it’s time for photo-opps but quite dumb on matters of real significance.” HORNBILL

    Of course, LKS is right in highlighting the issue of sexism and not just in but also out of Parliament. But more serious issues than sexism has marred and disrupts Malaysia’s parliamentary proceedings and continues to do so. When the Brits decided in the 1950s perhaps it was time to let Malaysians govern themselves, they had their doubts as to whether we could do so peacefully – or whether bloody race riots would erupt with the same consequences they had for India which had to be partitioned. They were proven to be correct because race riots did break out in 1969.

    Some three decades later we still have not learned the lessons of May 13th.

    But like I said earlier, credit must go to all MPs for not resorting to the use of their fists on each other on the floor of Parliament – like we see here on the floor of the Senate of the State of Georgia last week. One Republican senator slugging it out on a Democrat senator for calling him names. We see the same in Taiwan, South Korea and Japan.

    You say “follow to its logical conclusion” but what is that logical conclusion? There can never be closure. Just like there can never be closure to name calling and racial slurs and defamatory remarks made under the cloak of parliamentary privilege.

    There is political capital to be made in pursuing the issue in the initial stages perhaps. But like Alvin says it is like flogging a dead horse – and I agree with Godfather who says that it is time to let it go.

    The rest of the developed world is looking for reasons to justify their
    belief that Asians do not have what it takes to make democracy work in their own backyard and should therefore stop telling them what to do in their front yard. Developing countries they say look for ways to modernize their economies in one decade when it took them a hundred years to get to where they are today – and they are right. Malaysia may have modern skyscrapers, tallest and longest bridges but that is no measure of what development ought to be. And our values and value systems are not developing in tandem.

    We may have a building we call Parliament Building leaking though it may be sometimes and in some places, which houses our Parliament but our MPs have no respect for the values which we need to make democracy work. The ruling national coalition is not interested in debate and with their two-third majority steamrolls everything without any discussion. As for the Opposition, it is reduced to opposing for the sake of opposing since nobody is listening. Can you blame the Opposition?

    By revisiting incidents of sexism again and again does not help us concentrate on the more serious issues. It becomes a distraction after some time. But of course this is just my opinion. You may disagree.

  17. #17 by Loh on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 3:01 am

    ///They were proven to be correct because race riots did break out in 1969.

    Some three decades later we still have not learned the lessons of May 13th.///

    The persons who started May 13 was doing the British a favour to prove them right!

    So UMNO was right to repeat the threat of May 13 because it seems that lessons have not been learned yet.

  18. #18 by sotong on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 7:15 am

    It is properly and fully concluded when Mr. Lim said so……when he stops posting the issue.

  19. #19 by Bigjoe on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 7:57 am

    When the PM first got into office, his supporters says give him time to change things as he has to deal with the warlords in gov and party. His critics kept pointing out that this would never change but was not well-heard.

    Today we see the critics being proven right. This PM does thing so slow, by the time he gets it done, the guilty already got away with it and the most innocent gets hurt.

    That is what these political sluts like Nazri, Johari Baharom, Bung Mocktar, Rafidah, Samy all know…

    The PM is like the guy that surround yourself with sluts and still want to deny his proclivities?

  20. #20 by k1980 on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 8:14 am


    Europe’s top envoy to Malaysia Thursday urged the government to roll back its affirmative action policy for majority Malays…

  21. #21 by maya on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 9:24 am

    Uncle Lim,
    The best you can do for these clowns is to translate the letter from the ambassador to Malay, as i seriously doubt they have the language skills to understand the English version. On second thoughts, dont bother because i am sure, being mentally challenged as they are, the Malay version wont make any more sense. And about Nazri, well i rest my case. God bless you and the rest of us Malaysians.

  22. #22 by Jeffrey on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 9:44 am

    The focus of present debate is not whether Mohd Said Yusuf and Bung Mohtar should be taken to task for their sexist bochor remarks. I think all are agreed that they should – and have been taken to task up to an extent of :-
    . govt getting the duo to apologise to all Malaysian women (albeit MP Fong Po Kuan excepted), when before they would not have even considered doing so; and
    · the outrage of civil society, women groups and even international groupings like ASEAN Members of Parliament and the MPs and State Legislators attending the GlobalPOWER (Partnership of Women Elected/Appointed Representatives) 2007 Conference in Washington May 7 – 11, 2007 had already been galvanized and condemnation widely expressed;
    · “the government has reminded everyone, especially members of parliament, and those in high positions to always be mindful and responsible in their actions.

    The focus is whether the bochor issue should be kept alive from ‘this point of time forward by YB Kit/DAP’ because the apology was hardly sincere with the government perceived to trivialise it based on the “culture” of treating every misconduct as “impunity” or let go and stopped as Godfather/Undergrad2 said when balancing against (a) futility of flogging dead horse of making the government do better, when it is unlikely that they would (b) the possible boomerang effect of Kit/DAP being perceived petty to persevere on that issue, even now, or even hypocritical or for political opportunism when everyone sexism is so pervasive an aspect of our patriarchal culture that many others including PAS and others have been guilty one time or another of sexist remarks (though in degree & proportion not as crass as the duo’s bochor) but the fuss created was not so much by comparison and other infractions of the ruling party’s politicians including statements and actions based on racial and religious bigotry, though have been protested against, have not however, generated a continuous condemnation if they were not apologised for (albeit insincerely) as compared to the duo bochor MPs, Mohd Said Yusuf and Bung Mohtar. So the issue is whether we should stop at this juncture considering all things.

  23. #23 by Jimm on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 10:38 am

    Just read “Ucapan Tengku Tan Sri Razaleigh Hamzah di Legasi Tun Abd Razak”, so true and so real as to why we have been threated all these while.
    At least, I am the last one standing for my ancestors.
    Happy to live through in whatever Malaysia have to offer me …

  24. #24 by moong cha cha II on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 10:38 am

    is this why our gomen can think of doing a teh-tarik in space (initially) eventhough the taxi-ticket to space is RM100.0 million and in space got no gravity ?

    imagine how many Bersama-Mu-TV3 needy people can be helped with RM100.0 million.

    after sending our spaceman to space to do (gomen still thinking project to do), what then ?

  25. #25 by undergrad2 on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 11:11 am

    Jeffrey QC,

    Your attempt at an in-depth analysis of the meaning, significance and consequences of the stereotyping of women by men is fully appreciated. Your definition of “sexism” however appears broader than mine; but it does not change the role that sexist behavior plays in our multi religious and multiethnic society.

    It is true that Article 8(2) of our Constitution prohibits gender discrimination. But sexism in my opinion goes beyond the issue of gender discrimination. It is a behavioral problem not unrelated to religious value systems.

    Among Muslims and Jews, it is part of their religions to physically separate men and women in their group and social activities. For example, in places of worship their women are physically separated from each other. You only need to walk into a mosque or a Jewish synagogue to see how they are separated from each other. The intention is not to demean the women but it is part of their religious beliefs system if you will to discriminate – and I use the term “discriminate” not in a negative way. Their attitude towards the role of women follows the Qur’an and the Torah. Muslims as a matter of tradition believe their women have a more important role to play in their homes rather than in the office i.e. their workplace is in the home, better spent raising and educating their children. My orthodox Jewish neighbors do not want their wives to work or rather they prefer to have their wives work at home.

    In the Christian Bible, Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior chose only men as His apostles – though some say Mary Magdalene was the 13th apostle. “Sexism” some say is as old as the Bible. In Genesis, God when He created Eve almost as afterthought and out of Adam’s rib, some say, was sexist. Some say writers of the Old Testament working from a feminist angle later changed all that by having a second version of the Creation having Eve created not out of Adam’s rib but out of the same dust from which Adam was created. Eve according to this second version of the Creation was created as Adam’s equal.

    Sexism has its roots in religion. Today Muslim men and orthodox Jews are by definition sexist in their behavior. It is the same in the Muslim world everywhere and is certainly not unique to Malaysia. It is not discrimination in the negative sense of the word. To be sexist is a socially acceptable and even desirable group behavior. Indeed it is an integral part of their being though less as individuals but more as a community.

    However, politically it would not be correct to encourage sexist behavior since there are constitutional provisions which guarantee equality among the sexes; and a plethora of laws making it illegal to discriminate along gender lines.

    Having said that, what happened in our Parliament was worse than that. Those remarks were derogatory. It was disgusting. It is deplorable. Period.

    But one would have to put it in context and see it for what it is. Let us not politicize it in return for short term political capital. Whatever political capital DAP has gained, in my opinion, has been frittered away by over politicization of a single issue – voters plagued by ‘sexist fatigue’ are ready to jump the bandwagon. I don’t know about you but I have.

  26. #26 by anakbaram on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 11:48 am

    The way that the Malaysian Institution handle this “bocor” case is another instant where they brush things under the carpet. This is the same thing that they did for the SMS case when a mob surround the chuch at the Baptism in St. Peter’s. They claim that they had an interview with him. But the whole process is not transparent. It reminds me of how some parents trying to calm a child by hitting the table chair or table where the fall. These objects do not have feelings. If they mean justice give the guy what he deserve. Do not do it to keep us quite. But do it so that no one does this in the future.

  27. #27 by k1980 on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 12:04 pm

    //after sending our spaceman to space to do (gomen still thinking project to do), what then ?//

    What then? Well, the PM will shamelessly proclaim: “A small step for man, but a giant step for “towering” malays…. After that, another 2 mat rempits will be selected to go to Russia for training for their coming attraction “Freefall in space” costing malaysian taxpayers another RM5 billion….to hell with the rapes in Johor and the people struggling to survive below the poverty-line, malaysia boleh beli tiket ke angkasa lepas

  28. #28 by DiaperHead on Friday, 22 June 2007 - 8:34 pm

    I thought ‘bocor’ is an issue for the Works Minister??

  29. #29 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 7:42 am

    “….//…Sexism has its roots in religion…//..” – Undergrad2.

    If we suppose you are 100% right, and you are 100% religious, then:-

    1. can you maintain internal consistency to condemn sexist remarks or behaviour and yet uphold sanctity of religion or core values of religion which you say is/are the roots of sexism?

    2. Religion deals with the human effort to seek ultimate meaning in life and mystery of life, of its origins and its destiny. So if Religion directly or indirectly suggest the inferiority and secondary position of women in relation to men, does it not suggest to someone deeply religious that it is true that life itself – and the almighty – had intended women to be ‘inferior’ in the sense to serve men just like the way you explain God created Eve almost as afterthought and out of Adam’s rib to serve and cure his loneliness and not the other way around? Or that men have deviated from the true path by assuming women equal? Or that there is no just thing as sexism because women being in subordinated position deserves supercilious condescension and patronage when one is kind and bochor insults when one is not – all with justifications, supported by religious values?

  30. #30 by DarkHorse on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 8:26 am

    No. ‘Bocor’ is when, according to our PM, you have a hole in your head leading to brain drain to nearby S’pore.

  31. #31 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 8:52 am

    Undergrad2: In short, based on what you said, the question is whether traditional religions and their precepts and nuances, are actually compatible with the concept of equality of men and women and equal opportunity for both and, if equality were a deemed a desired social value representing progress, whether real equality can ever be achieved in a society dominated by religion(s), and if religion(s) are more important – and true -, shouldn’t be abandon this patronising hypocrisy that women are equal with men and be forthright in condoning sexist remarks and conducts rather than condemning them?

  32. #32 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 8:53 am

    Typo correction of part in capitals – “…shouldn’t WE abandon this patronising hypocrisy..”

  33. #33 by bhuvan.govindasamy on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 12:50 pm

    A man who is uncouth about women, shows total disrespect to his own mother.

  34. #34 by shortie kiasu on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 1:24 pm

    All Ministers and Barisan Nasional (BN) MPs are suffering from permanent indisgestion and would not be able to digest the statement of the European Commission Ambassador to Malaysia, Thierry Rommel, and many other positive suggestions. They are immuned to digestion.

  35. #35 by TruthEnquirer on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 6:05 pm

    bhuvan.govindasamy you said that “a man who is uncouth about women, shows total disrespect to his own mother” and simply blame the man without recollecting that the man is uncouth because his mother didn’t bring him up well. This means that the mother is to be blamed as well and deserves such a son.

  36. #36 by TruthEnquirer on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 6:08 pm

    Be careful of the European Commission Ambassador to Malaysia, Thierry Rommel. His grandfather might be the famous German general, Erwin Rommel, also known as the “Desert Fox for his brilliant military exploits in World War II battles in North Africa.

  37. #37 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 10:38 pm

    “….if religion(s) are more important – and true -, shouldn’t we abandon this patronising hypocrisy that women are equal with men and be forthright in condoning sexist remarks and conducts rather than condemning them?” Jeffrey

    Let’s try and answer this question in a light hearted sort of way lest we offend the serious readers on such a serious issue as religion. It is best to leave the word ‘sexist’ alone for now, for the word ‘sexist’ is likely to mean different things to different people and different things to the same people when behavior we refer to as ‘sexist’ occurs in a different context.

    Start with the premise: God is sexist – if I may. Well, God created Eve later than Adam, didn’t He? Why did God do that? He created Eve the first Woman from Adam’s ribs and not from dust out of which He created the first Man. Why is that?

    Sometime ago, the New York Times wrote that Eve was not Adam’s first wife and only wife. Eve was not the first Woman. According to Hebrew legend recorded in the Alphabet of Ben Sira, Lilith was Adam’s first wife who preceded Eve. In this version, Lilith was created from earth just as Adam was. Legend has it that she balked at Adam for wanting to make love with him on top. Adam refused her demand that she be treated as his equal. So she walked out on him. She was later sent to live with the demons and became a demon herself. You cannot find Lilith in the Genesis. Indeed this mystery woman could be found in a single line in Isaiah and here she is mentioned as a female demon. But that is another matter.

    But it is true if you limit yourself strictly to Genesis, there was no Lilith and Adam never had to choose. Now that we have done away with the historical aspect of it which is what the Bible is all about – a history book made up of many other books written by different writers over a period of four thousand years, words guided and inspired by God through His prophets in the form of rules and laws, and songs and poetry etc – we are one step nearer our goal. We have given some historical context to the concept of equality of the sexes and a glimpse into the roots of ‘sexism’ and how in fact it derives its origin.

    Some of us are fortunate to be living today in societies which are organized along secular lines. Others are fortunate to be living in either secular societies or societies organized around religion – one or the other. Malaysians are not so fortunate for they live in a country which has a constitution that is neither secular nor religious. The philosophical aspect of Islam is that is that societies must necessarily be organized around the Word of God. Islam is not just a religion it is also everything else. To the Muslims the notion that the state can be separated from religion (read: Islam) is inconceivable and therefore incomprehensible. Similarly, it is inconceivable and incomprehensible how a fellow Muslim could leave his or her religion – and therefore there is no method or procedure that allows him or her to do so.

    The concept of the separation of state from religion is relatively new. Prior to that – two millennia earlier – the state was linked to religion, one merging with the other. The First Amendment in the U.S. Constitution in trying to avoid the bloodshed that occurred in Europe as a result of religious persecution, has separated state from religion. Thus sexist behavior if it were to occur in the U.S. Congress today would be condemned for what it is – for being politically incorrect but would have none of the religious connotations.

    Now that we have given some context to the behavior we attribute as ‘sexist’ perhaps we are nearer to handling some of the issues associated with it.

    You asked why the hypocrisy?

    We cannot answer this question without reference to our Constitution of 1957 which, as if to add to the confusion, is neither secular nor religious. Would it be ‘sexist’ for a male Muslim MP to say to a female Muslim MP that she should remember to walk six steps behind her husband during a state ceremony. Article 11 of the Constitution after all says among other things, that Islam is the “official religion of the federation”. Would it be sexist for the same MP to call for a non-Muslim MP to do the same? I am sorry but where is the hypocrisy?

    Now what happened in Parliament recently was not about being ‘sexist’ nor has anything to do with ‘sexism’. Those two MPs were guilty of something more serious than that! Indeed ‘sexism’ which has come to be regarded as having a negative quality, is too kind a word to use to refer to their behavior. Their behavior is downright crude, rude and insulting and the Speaker should have censured the two immediately and not wait for the Opposition to move a motion which was dead on arrival for having failed to comply with standing orders.


    So can we all move on??

  38. #38 by Godamn Singh on Saturday, 23 June 2007 - 11:46 pm

    There seems to be a lot of confusion on what the word ‘sexist’ and ‘sexcism’ is all about.

    A good example of a sexist remark can be found on a report on Theresa Kok in Malaysiakini when a headline screams she is a woman but an effective legislator!

    What does that mean? That a woman cannot be an effective legislator??

    (One of my posts is missing, Jeffrey. So you’ll have to wait for it. It could take years to arrive. A malfunctioning WordPress? Your guess is as good as mine).

  39. #39 by DiaperHead on Sunday, 24 June 2007 - 3:43 am

    All Muslims are sexist in their behaviour. All Malays are therefore sexist. Before you guys go screaming “Racist” think again. Don’t be liek that chap Nazri who scream racists at DAP MPs.

  40. #40 by bhuvan.govindasamy on Sunday, 24 June 2007 - 1:26 pm


    You may be correct in your assessment that the offender’s mother did not raise him well. However we know of many people who have turned bad even though they have been raised by the best of families.

    I believe in both the taught & thought process. While we are young, we undergo the taught process, where our parents, teachers, relatives, elders & friends teach us many things. But, after a certain age, our own experience & maturity must kick in for the thought process to begin. It is the thought process that enables us to go beyong our initial programming to become better human beings.

    In this case, this particular MP, Najis-nazri & Hisap-mmudin have neither the maturity nor the thinking capacity of a cockaroach.

You must be logged in to post a comment.