Irshad Manji has plenty of enemies

Reza Aslan has been making rounds on the talk show circuit recently to hype his book No God, but God. In No god but God, Aslan challenges the clash of civilizations mentality that has distorted our view of Islam and explains this critical faith in all its complexity, beauty, and compassion. Irshad Manji (born to Indian and Egyptian parents) on the other hand takes a different approach. USA Today reports: Irshad Manji has plenty of enemies among her fellow Muslims. Her critique of Islam is frank and fierce. She defends the invasion of Iraq. She sympathizes with Israel. Shes a lesbian and doesnt try to hide it. Then there is the hair, she adds, referring to the spiky highlights that sharpen her live-wire manner. What has brought this Uganda-born Asian-Canadian to prominence is her book, The Trouble With Islam Today, just out in paperback in the United States where she has been touring and talking. As you can imagine, a practicing Muslim with such unique views might be a product of an unusual background. The events that shaped Manjis views date to her childhood. She was born to parents of Indian and Egyptian descent who were among thousands of Asians expelled from Uganda by dictator Idi Amin in 1972, who saw them as outsiders imported by the countrys British colonialists. Her family landed in the Vancouver suburb of Richmond, where her mother first sold Avon products and then worked as a cook for an airline. Her father was a carpenter, then a real estate agent. The parents divorced 19 years ago and she has had no contact with her father since. In her book she describes him as physically abusive.

Manji was 4 when her father put her in a free baby-sitting service at Rose of Sharon Baptist Church. She said her stream of questions about Jesus were met with encouraging smiles by the woman who supervised the Bible study. She made me believe my questions were worth asking, Manji writes. Maybe thats what motivated me, at age 8, to win the Most Promising Christian of the Year award. Manji often finds herself in the unenviable position of defending herself both against liberals and mainstream Islam. She recently showed off her two-fisted style on HBOs Real Time With Bill Maher, going up against liberal co-panelists to defend the invasion of Iraq as a human rights issue the only way Saddam Husseins brutal regime could be toppled. To the argument that Iraq was never a threat to the United States she replied that this was the kind of reasoning that ignores the suffering of people living under Middle East dictatorships. In the last 100 years alone, she says, more Muslims have been tortured and murdered at the hands of other Muslims than at the hands of any former imperial power. I am sure you are wondering the same thing as me, right? When is the Fatwa coming? She says that when she met Rushdie in Toronto, he told her: Whenever a writer puts out a thought, it can be disagreed with vigorously, vehemently, even violently. But it cannot be un-thought. And that is the great, permanent gift that the writer gives to the world. A professor of religion at San Diego State University says the following about Manji: She threatens my male authority and says things about Islam that I wish were not true. She has a big mouth, and fact upon fact to corroborate her analysis. She is a lesbian, and my madrassa training has instilled, almost into my DNA, that Allah hates gays and lesbians. I really should hate this woman. But then I look into my heart and engage my mind, and I come to a discomfiting conclusion: Irshad is telling the truth.
Religion

POSTED BY abhi @ 5:03 PM

PERMALINK EMAIL TO A FRIEND

FACEBOOK

76 comments
1 Al Mujahid on April 30, 2005 5:46 PM Direct link Irshad Manji's views on Israel are more right wing than the most extreme Likudites. Her hysterical defense of colonialism pits her against idiots like Dinesh D'Souza and her work is eminently forgettable. There are plentiful problems with both Islam and Muslims. Manji's work is however as scholarly as the critique of Islam done on the LGF website. (Little Green Football) 2 Al Mujahid on April 30, 2005 5:54 PM Direct link It has to be noted that even the most liberal, progressive 'Muslim' voices in North America have all criticized her book. 3 razib on April 30, 2005 6:11 PM Direct link could you elaborate some? i've only a read a little bit of manji's book because i'm not interested in the individualized-islam she seems to promote cuz i don't think it has much of a chance in the short term, but her opinions on israel seem to be more like what you'd expect from a moderate democrat in the USA, not a "likudite." 4 Al Mujahid on April 30, 2005 6:32 PM Direct link Razib, Her views on Israel are not in line with the views of moderate democrats. Her views are actually more in line with the right wing of the 'likudites'. For example she talks about widespread 'muslim' complicity in the Holocaust. She talks about how the 'Palestinians' volunatarily left 'Palestine' in 1948 and embarresingly picks up all her arguments and

research from a book by Maurice Pearlman and articles from the Jerusalem Post. Such views have been thoroughly discredited (not that they were ever taken seriously to begin with) I started reading her book and went had a hard time following her rendition of Islamic history, jurisprudence and the concept of ijtihaad. Her knowlededge of classical Islam will not muster a passing grade in Classical Islam 101 offered at a Community College. I quickly moved to the chapters on modern islamic politics and Israel. 5 razib on April 30, 2005 6:38 PM Direct link well, i guess it's hard to be a lesbian believing muslim. 6 anand on April 30, 2005 7:49 PM Direct link this woman is fascinating to me. for all that i agree with her about, the net impression that i get from her is that she is a white man's joke, almost to the point of being a paid shill to push their beliefs and ideas for reform in muslim communities. there is much to be lauded in her book for being frank about, and she often speaks of "literalism being the mainstream only in islam," while the book she has written is so dramatized and idiotic she winds up literalizing and making mainstream the most extreme stereotypes of muslims and muslim attitudes. According to Ms. Manji, more or less every arab/muslim man has deeply held, positive views on wifebeating, suicide bombings, enforcement of "fatwas", and on and on, but will publicly denounce these views when questioned by a westerner. nevertheless, according to her these are core values that are dear to even the most common muslim. this woman has almost no common ground at all with the average, or even liberal muslim(or even non-muslim easterner), to begin dialogues for reform. her views on israel and iraq are so far beyond the graph of opinions even an extremely liberal western muslim could seriously have. i have a feeling that if an internment program happened for muslimamericans, this woman would come out in defense of such a program, of course on as many national talk shows and talking-head showcases as possible. i'm not one of those people who thinks that reform must be done exclusively quietly and internally, as some of my pakistani friends have offered as their qualm with ms. manji.

however, when EVERY call for reform from this woman comes from an episode of Oprah or Bill Maher or an editorial in USA Today, you soon only see her as an opportunist and publicity whore. i doubt that any member of the muslim community had ever heard of her efforts until she dropped their weight on top of them from the top of the national press. if she were sincere in her efforts to reach the mosques and community centers, and actually change the attitudes of "average" muslims, i have a feeling her viewpoints wouldn't be that new and loud. Really, the communities are not as monolithic and sword-wielding as she'd like you to believe, and if they were, there would have been many more terror attacks, sleeper cells, and law-breakers in the us, if ms. manji's images really typify a community of over 5 million here. but maybe she's just talking about canada. the above being my views, i think that, in the interest of "going large", and with the evidence of her views on iraq and israel, which are not even moderate but congratulatory and filled with adulation to the point of being more enthusiastic than the neocons and right-wing pundits, her views are completely malleable to power, and that she is an opportunistic licker of white nuts, an auntie tom of the highest zeal. that was nasty. 7 Emperor Hirohito on April 30, 2005 7:54 PM Direct link crazy ideas or not, one should respect the fact that her book has no problem being published here while she probably would've been stoned to death for writing this book in the muslim countries of the middle east muslim, hindu, sikh....whatever your religion may be you can't deny the fact that nearly everyone wants to live in a christian dominated country....that alone says something, don't you think? 8 Saurav on April 30, 2005 8:07 PM Direct link I haven't read her, but, quesitons of her academic merits aside, her website makes it sounds like she's doing decent work, even if her analysis of contemporary politics is a little shallow. Endorsing and asking for more U.S. "humanitarian" military intervention in the Muslim world betrays a total lack of

understanding of what has driven and most likely will continue to drive American foreign policy and how to get to a better foreign policy, even if it's a nice sentiment. But it does seems like she's doing a lot of decent work in what she views as her community in getting people to talk abot things and putting herself out there as a very public individualist and queer person; it would be much easier for her to reject her faith and the people in her community entirely. Of course, there are groups like ">Al Fatiha and others who do the same, so it would be dumb to buy into the idea that she and her politics define queer Muslim resistance. But I'll never dis someone who's asking other people to think. 9 hotlips on April 30, 2005 8:22 PM Direct link

I dont buy the line that she is a white mans stooge. She is getting death threats all the time. Nobody puts their head on their chopping board like that just to be a 'publicity whore'. Look at Theo Van Gogh in Holland, this thing is real. She has more balls in this respect than many a Muslim man.

10 vinod on April 30, 2005 11:28 PM Direct link Instapundit has this blurb -- which if it *really* does describe Manji's views, I'm probably quite supportive "ISLAM HAS NOT CONQUERED ARAB CULTURE -- ARAB CULTURE HAS CONQUERED ISLAM:" I'm watching Irshad Manji on Tucker Carlson's PBS show, plugging her book on the trouble with Islam. She's quite impressive, and it will be interesting -- and, I have to say, an exacting test of the "moderate muslims" we've heard about, but not so much from, since 9/11 -- to see how she's received. 11 anand on April 30, 2005 11:54 PM Direct link to hotlips: i'd agree with you if her statements weren't made from the us or canada. if she were on a tour of pakistan or iran and went about "reforming" islam(excluding her political beliefs) i'd give her much respect.

12 Manish Vij on May 1, 2005 12:00 AM Direct link if she were on a tour of pakistan or iran and went about "reforming" islam(excluding her political beliefs) i'd give her much respect. Rushdie had great luck with the Iran and Pakistan strategy. 13 razib on May 1, 2005 12:12 AM Direct link i'd agree with you if her statements weren't made from the us or canada. if she were on a tour of pakistan or iran and went about "reforming" islam(excluding her political beliefs) i'd give her much respect. christ, that's a really high standard. basically, you're saying that she needs to put her life at risk and face imprisonment and likely execution (in iran) for you to respect her. i assume you are as balsy about your own political/social views? 14 Manish Vij on May 1, 2005 12:15 AM Direct link Here's what happened the last time an Iran critic toured the country: Shahram Azam said he examined Zahra Kazemi, a 54-year-old Canadian freelance journalist of Iranian origin, in a military hospital in Tehran on June 26, 2003, and noticed horrific injuries to her entire body that could only have been caused by torture and rape. It was just days after she was arrested for taking photographs outside a Tehran prison during student-led protests against the ruling theocracy... She had a skull fracture, two broken fingers, missing fingernails, a crushed big toe and a smashed nose. She also had deep scratches on the neck and evidence of flogging on the legs and back. "As a doctor I could see this was caused by torture," Azam said through an interpreter... He said as a male doctor in a military hospital, he was banned from examining a woman's genitals, but the nurse who did so told him of "brutal damage." 15 Al Mujahid on May 1, 2005 12:40 AM Direct link Vinod, Irshad Manji has no credence at all in either Conservative Muslims, Moderate Muslims or hell even

non practicing cultural Muslims in North America. I would agree with you, if she had an audience in the moderate muslim community. Her lunatic support for the Israeli occupation and imperialism and her attempts at passing her personal experiences as Islamic practices have damaged her credibility to a point of no return. Her book has provoked no debate whatsoever in the moderate Muslim community. For example the Canadian Muslim Congress ( which happens to support gay marriage and you cant get a more liberal Muslim organization) has lambasted this book. She has provoked as much debate in the moderate Muslim community as the debates provoked by the weekly diatribe of Daniel Pipes. Her book is a joke. She has however brilliantly capitalized on the new market for Islamic books in the West especially books critical of Islam/Muslims by Muslims. I am not a Muslim but my family is Muslim and I have some stake in the modernization of Islam and Muslims. However the vehicle for that change is not Irshad Manji. She hasnt passed the first test of credibility to provoke any debate. 16 anand on May 1, 2005 12:41 AM Direct link and it was said in response to hotlips. this isn't as ballsy as you think it is, and the rewards that have gone into her pockets from the publicity she has gotten and sales of her book far exceed the cost she is paying by pissing people off, at least in north america. if you think she has opponents in the muslim community, she also has waaaaaayy more supporters amongst white folks who respond to her message, just look at all the awards she's won. post sept 11 she snapped at a chance to speak out as a supposed academic saying all the things that moz-o-phobes want to hear. her career has been made not by making ballsy statements but by appealing to people's prejudices, and that explains her lack of a single political POV outside the spectrum of pc acceptability of conservative republicans. (except for her being a lesbian)

maybe when this issue has blown over her life will be in danger, when the money she's raked in has been blown and no newschannels fly her around and put her up in hotels. but by then im sure no one'll be hot over her anymore. 17 anand on May 1, 2005 12:54 AM Direct link to clarify my last comment, it was in reference to razib, who said "christ, that's a really high standard. basically, you're saying that she needs to put her life at risk and face imprisonment and likely execution (in iran) for you to respect her. i assume you are as balsy about your own political/social views?" 18 razib on May 1, 2005 12:56 AM Direct link if you think she has opponents in the muslim community, she also has waaaaaayy more supporters amongst white folks who respond to her message, just look at all the awards she's won. yeah, she got awards and $$$, but what's that if you have to get bodyguards? it's how much you weight the situation. many people who love money or are not that wealthy would trade circumstances with her anyday. but, as a lesbian with a white collar job, i don't think the trade off is worth it. the gay part is a big deal in my opinion...being north america's premier gay muslim is not a position i would really want. 19 anand on May 1, 2005 1:03 AM Direct link ...being north america's premier gay muslim is not a position i would really want. i'd say it's not that bad, i'm certain that she doesn't chill with many mozzes anymore. i can guarantee you she's feted and toasted at society events at clubs where there probably isn't another muslim in the building. you can almost picture the crowd of white folks in a standing ovation for her for her courage "telling the truth about her people", and these are events filled with plenty who accept gay people. i still like some of her message, and i must say i like her hair. 20 najeeb on May 1, 2005 1:33 AM Direct link

I have exchanged some emails with her mainly commenting on her work. But, recently I am getting doubts about the strength of her message. It is more like she is telling what the conservative americans want to hear. And any attempt to cleanse a religion does't really work well when you start with a premise that there is a whole lot of trouble with it - though as an agnostic I don't have a problem listening to anyone ranting about the trouble with religions. For George Bush's view of the world or for the catholic coverup of pedophiles, isn't it kind of pointless to write a book called 'Trouble with Christianity'? Now, you might say the terrorists are using the religion much more than Bush, in that case, I'd rather like an approach of 'Trouble with muslims' than 'Trouble with Islam', especially if you are looking for results among the believers. (btw, she was on Fareed Zakharia's show last night on PBS). 21 Manish Vij on May 1, 2005 1:37 AM Direct link Reza Aslan was on The Daily Show recently (watch clip). 22 razib on May 1, 2005 1:52 AM Direct link you can almost picture the crowd of white folks in a standing ovation for her for her courage "telling the truth about her people" what was that someone else was saying about generalizations??? anyway.... recently I am getting doubts about the strength of her message. It is more like she is telling what the conservative americans want to hear some of the things she says "conservative americans" would probably agree with, but a lot of the things she says they probably don't agree with. i personally find a lot of irshad's message facile (judging from what i've heard her say on the talk show circuit and about 1/3 of her book that i managed to read before getting too bored)-and as a practical proposition i think that islam has a long way to go overall before it will be accepting of homosexuality as a normal lifestyle. hell, the majority of christians don't accept it, and the christian religion is shifted over a lot in terms of reconciliation with enlightenment values. that being said...i think this idea that she is living off the fat of the land and being feted by white folks is somewhat condescending.

remember, the leader of the conservative americans invited muslim leaders to the whitehouse after 911 and many white americans, some of them probably conservative, stood by muslims and defended their rights as americans after 9-11. she believes in islam and she is reconciled to being gay. i think that is going to result in some weird (from the world's perspective) positions, i don't think we should assume that the major component in her motivations was monetary self-interest. there are many apostate/discontented ex-muslims out there, if there was a lot of opportunity in it you'd figure people would rush to cash in. 23 Al Mujahid on May 1, 2005 1:53 AM Direct link najeeb, what did she say on Fareed's show ? Do you have a link ? 24 razib on May 1, 2005 1:55 AM Direct link p.s. the easiest way to please the haters btw would be for her to disavow the religion, go apostate and do a ibn warraq with more gen-x hair. 25 Al Mujahid on May 1, 2005 1:58 AM Direct link Its interesting that the three people on here who have posted with Arab/Persian names (presumably of muslim origin) are all non practising muslims and are either atheists or agnostics. Maybe thats the future of American Muslims. 26 razib on May 1, 2005 2:03 AM Direct link Its interesting that the three people on here who have posted with Arab/Persian names (presumably of muslim origin) are all non practising muslims and are either atheists or agnostics. Maybe thats the future of American Muslims. i'm not sure religious muslims would be as comfortable in a kufir dominated board like this :) but like some people have said, i think "muslims" who would be attracted or interested in "desi" identity/issues will be less attached to a religious identity. after all, i remember a few weeks ago a muslim (believing) came to this board and basically said the reason that desi muslims are messed up is because of indian (implicitly hindu) culture rather than islam. i have heard evangelical christian indians say similar things.

27 anand on May 1, 2005 2:18 AM Direct link i'm about to say something that is might anger a lot of people and may be straying into territory that even the regular posters here would sooner avoid, but here goes: do you think she'd get any of the press or awards she's gotten if she did not emphatically speak up for the israeli occupation? there are plenty of public muslim reformists, such as aslan, and many groups that have come out many times to denounce terrorism and other evils, but none of them have gotten near the adulation she has in our media. part of her press comes from her image as a woman and a lesbian, but would she be feted as she has with open criticisms of that political issue? when i asserted earlier that her views seem to be bent by deference to power, i can't think of any other issue that better illustrates that. 28 razib on May 1, 2005 2:26 AM Direct link do you think she'd get any of the press or awards she's gotten if she did not emphatically speak up for the israeli occupation? what awards? i can't find a list on her website. 29 hotlips on May 1, 2005 4:37 AM Direct link when i asserted earlier that her views seem to be bent by deference to power, i can't think of any other issue that better illustrates that. You can make the case that other Muslim writers views are bent by deference to Male Islamic Establishment power. Why arent Muslim writers and other 'refuseniks' railing against the decade long low-level genocide that has been taking place in Sudan? What power are they deferring to there? If Muslims are going to characterise 'The West' as a relentless opressor and you are going to bring in issues of deference to power you cant define the terms of that game alone.

Whatever her message, anand's depiction of her having no guts is facile. She receives death threats all the time. Shoot the messenger is the way to go, with the crude Uncle Tom line of argument. I just dont buy it. The lady has more guts than most. 30 MD on May 1, 2005 9:26 AM Direct link anand: she is a *white man's* joke and a shill for *their* beliefs? Hmmm, what are the white man's beliefs again? And how can we find a way to make them the cause of all problems in the world? Can I blame the white man for my bad hair day? And I think it's interesting that you say her ideas on Israel are beyond what any Western Muslim should 'seriously have.' Why? Surely, she is entitled to her beliefs, right or wrong, in a free society? She may very well be the publicity hound you say, but I think it's interesting that most of the comments have been about what she should or shouldn't say, as opposed to what she actually has said. If I didn't read any of the links, I would have no idea of what her beliefs are exactly from this thread, and I find that interesting. Does she support two states, Israel and Palestine? The right of return? I'm sure her views have been discussed elsewhere, so why not the specific views on this thread? Why more interest in her authenticity to hold a view than the actual view itself? 31 najeeb on May 1, 2005 12:46 PM Direct link Al Mujahid, I don't have the link to the program - may be PBS would have it. I caught it towards the tail end of the program, but I don't think she mentioned any more than what she has mentioned in her web site - http://www.muslimrefusenik.com. There was another lady (who was wearing hijab) who was also a reformer based on canada/U.S. She works more towards reforming muslims compared to Irshad who is interested in reforming Islam itself. But, I personally think the other lady's messages would work well with practising muslims. 32 RC on May 1, 2005 12:48 PM Direct link I saw her book tour appearance on C-Span sometime last year. I hadnt made a firm opinion on her work one way or other at the time. (I didnt know she was an Isareli occupation defender ... I think I know which way I am leaning now) But one thing that I have noticed over and over... which is that anytime a bit out of the box and

reformist view comes out of Islamic write/thinker their background is from India in someways. I think the cultural diversity in India could be a cause of this. I also think that the Indian Muslims will be the force for reason in the entire Islamic world. 33 Al Mujahid on May 1, 2005 1:22 PM Direct link RC, Theres another Indian making the rounds. Her name is Asra Nomani (a former Wall Street Journal reporter) and she has come up with a new book called 'Standing alone in Mecca'. Shes from West Virginia and shes trying to de-segregate masjids all over the US. (Gender Segregation) She also organized the first female led prayer in New York. She actually did start a vigorous debate in both the moderate and conservative North American Muslim community over female imams and gender de-segregation in masjids. India has always had a very strong sufi influence in the Muslim community. That might have something to do with it. Also, Islam in India has obviously developed a new identity seperate from Arabian Islam. Though with the proliferation of the internet and cheap airline tickets, it seems to me that theres a very strong resurgence of Wahabist brand of Islam in North India and Pakistan. Of course in India its called Deobandism. For example, only 5% of Pakistanis are Deobandis while they control 80% of the Islamic schools/madrasas. Likewise in India, the hard line Deobandi thought is gaining popularity. For example, due to centuries of inter mingling with Hindus, Muslims had started celebrating the birthday of Muhammad by putting up lights on their homes ( kinda like Diwali). Now theres a strong movement to detest people from doing that. Fareed Zakaria in his book 'Illiberal Democracy' talks about his childhood in India when the faith was more fluid and fun, while lately the Islam is becoming more rigid and puritan and Saudized. For MD, You wanted specifics. I did give some specifics in my earlier post. I will post them here again "Her views are actually more in line with the right wing of the 'likudites'. For example she talks about widespread 'muslim' complicity in the Holocaust. She talks about how the

'Palestinians' volunatarily left 'Palestine' in 1948 and embarresingly picks up all her arguments and research from a book by Maurice Pearlman and articles from the Jerusalem Post. Such views have been thoroughly discredited (not that they were ever taken seriously to begin with)" 34 razib on May 1, 2005 1:22 PM Direct link I think the cultural diversity in India could be a cause of this. I also think that the Indian Muslims will be the force for reason in the entire Islamic world. irshad mentions that arabs call her an "indian peasant" all the time. my personal experience at masjid suggests to me that arabs know who truly are allah's chosen people. also, some of her critics accuse her of being a dissimulating ismaili. all in all, no matter what her beliefs, there is an ugliness in the way people try to see the duplicity in her. 35 MD on May 1, 2005 2:53 PM Direct link Al Mujahid: yes I did miss that. Thanks for pointing it out. 36 Saurav on May 1, 2005 3:54 PM Direct link But one thing that I have noticed over and over... which is that anytime a bit out of the box and reformist view comes out of Islamic write/thinker their background is from India in someways. Try reading Abdolkarim Soroush. Not a flaming radical, but certainly "a bit out of the box and reformist" and not from India. 37 Saurav on May 1, 2005 4:00 PM Direct link In the last 100 years alone, she says, more Muslims have been tortured and murdered at the hands of other Muslims than at the hands of any former imperial power. I have mad respect for someone who decides to be a public Muslim lesbian, but can we agree that regardless of how much courage she might have, her analysis on imperalism is facile at best? 38 boxy on May 1, 2005 4:08 PM Direct link

saurav

Islam is an Imperialistic religion and civilisation. Read Islamic history books, they are proud of it. 39 razib on May 1, 2005 4:20 PM Direct link I have mad respect for someone who decides to be a public Muslim lesbian, but can we agree that regardless of how much courage she might have, her analysis on imperalism is facile at best? well, i agree that there are major problems with that assertion. on the other hand, i find the "colonialist" arguments facile too. so, does facile assertion cancel facile assertion? no, probably not. but what do expect people to do? leave politics at the door and get down the nitty gritty of studying history? dream on. look at the comment above mine, about as content-filled as "islam is a religion of peace, all things bad with islam is about the cultures, not the religion." but these are the two modal antipodes. remember, mean IQ is 100. 40 Al Mujahid on May 1, 2005 4:31 PM Direct link Razib, Whats the median IQ in the US ? I know there was an article some time back on Gene Expression about IQ's around the world. Do you have a link for the racial break up in IQ for Americans ? 41 Al Mujahid on May 1, 2005 4:36 PM Direct link Saurav, I dont have mad respect for Muslim lesbians. In fact I have as much respect for Muslim lesbians as I have for Jewish Nazis or a black member of the KKK. The Quran clearly proscribes homosexuality and promises hell fire to the gays. So whats the point in being a member of a club, the founding charter of which promises you hell fire. 42 razib on May 1, 2005 5:33 PM Direct link

Whats the median IQ in the US ? I know there was an article some time back on Gene Expression about IQ's around the world. Do you have a link for the racial break up in IQ for Americans ?

IQ tests are normally set so that "100" is the mean. ie; the flynn effect where the absolute score keeps increasing (remember, the SAT was renormalized to 1000 after 35 years of absolute drops in the mean score). for the USA, the mean/median (normal dist., so basically the same) is a little over 100 for whites, 85 for blacks, around 100-105 for asian americans, 107-115 for jewish americans (they tend to do worse at visuo-spatial skewed tests, better at verbal ones, explaining the score variance. most nonashkenazi jewish groups have a much stronger correlation between overall aptitudes and VS abilities than jews). hispanics and native americans are usually in the 90ish range, give or take. standard deviation is usually about 15 points (so 95% of people are between 70-130, below 70 is "retarded" while above 130 usually qualifies for MENSA). the black-white test score gap should have all that info in it from a non-racist perspective (if you google to find data a lot of it is stored at white nationalist sites, and though i've double-checked to make sure those are correct, i figure it best not use such a cite for obvious reasons). here is steve sailer's summation of lynn & vanhanen's iq data by nations. the standard warning labels apply (i tend to trust values from first world nations, more or less, but the rest i'm not sure, and i really don't believe that some african nations have mean IQs around 60).... 43 razib on May 1, 2005 5:38 PM Direct link . The Quran clearly proscribes homosexuality and promises hell fire to the gays. that presupposes a literal and "orthodox" reading of the koran. i tend to agree with you, but religious people are mighty clever about reinterpreting things, so given enough time it is possible. the seventh day adventists are descended from a group that had nearly a dozen failed predictions of the end of the world, but they keep believing.... i tend to believe that most people have a "need" for whatever religion offers, so it shouldn't surprise us that gays are reworking their religious beliefs to fit in with their lifestyle. where i object is the tendency of some gays to simply act is religious beliefs of the whole group must/should conform to their own reading.

all that being said, i think irshad's overall point (ie; itjihad and all) is that the status quo of the "ulema" can be broken. two hundred years ago christians would have looked at you weirdly if you told them that many christian denominations would give up missionary activities because they subscribed to de facto universalism, or that gays would become open leaders of the church, or that the roman catholic church would engage in outreach to muslims. 44 razib on May 1, 2005 5:40 PM Direct link this post of mine that highlights the rise of female imams and religious scholars in china because of isolation from the world-wide islamic community i think illustrates the point that variation outside of "normal" bounds is possible given the proper circumstances. 45 RC on May 1, 2005 6:18 PM Direct link saurav, From name "Abdolkarim Soroush" appears Iranian. Iranians are the next most likely to come up with what I call "out of the box and reformist" views. My opinion anyways for whatever it is worth. 46 razib on May 1, 2005 6:29 PM Direct link you should look to SE asia too. indonesia and malaysia both have powerful reformist/liberalizing muslim movements. 47 Pico on May 1, 2005 9:48 PM Direct link 48 posts and surprisingly little information about Irshad Manji or her views. Posts which call dinesh an idiot and irshad a white man's shill bring nothing to the discussion. 48 blahblah on May 1, 2005 10:25 PM Direct link Irshad Manji has no credence at all in either Conservative Muslims, Moderate Muslims or hell even non practicing cultural Muslims in North America. For god's sake, you guys are arguing with a primitive Islamic nutball named "Al Mujahid". Go behead yourself, dude. You clearly don't belong in a Western civilization. 49 Saurav on May 2, 2005 12:17 AM Direct link

Saurav, I dont have mad respect for Muslim lesbians. In fact I have as much respect for Muslim lesbians as I have for Jewish Nazis or a black member of the KKK. The Quran clearly proscribes homosexuality and promises hell fire to the gays. AM, this hurts me because it inspires such a sense of hopelessness where none need exist (even if it's understandable). On the one hand, you reduce Islam to a literalist reading of the Quran, but don't do the same for Christianity or Judaism, which also specifically proscribe at least some forms of queerness (as do the laws of several states and many countries--like India). On the other hand you leave no room for queer people (and other dissidents) to try and stake a claim within their communities, which, imperfect as they are, they would like to remain in because that's where their family and friends and whole lives have been or because that's just who they happen to be. Further, let's be real--without people to think and reform and shape all communities--spiritual and otherwise-those communities would die under the sheer weight of their failure to meet the needs of human beings. That's the point, for me, in being a member of a community, the founding charter of which-right now--condemns me: to make it better. I'm not Muslim, but being queer in other homophobic communities--like upper caste Hindu Bangali spaces--is oppressive as well. I have respect for people who need or want to leave those communities behind as well, but for those of us who try to stay in them and, for instance, try to make sure other people don't have to go through what we went through, I think we deserve a little respect. 50 Saurav on May 2, 2005 12:31 AM Direct link well, i agree that there are major problems with that assertion. on the other hand, i find the "colonialist" arguments facile too. so, does facile assertion cancel facile assertion? no, probably not. but what do expect people to do? leave politics at the door and get down the nitty gritty of studying history? dream on. Razib, I respect people who generally are somewhat well-informed, who keep an open mind, who acknowledge internal inconsistencies in their arguments, who are somewhat committed to an empirical (as opposed to dogmatic) understanding of reality, and who recognize and admit when they're not being for a variety of reasons (including political), particularly when they're called out on it.

It's not so much about leaving politics at the door as it is about acknowledging what part of what your saying comes from a particular political or other perspective and what comes from deferring to a consensus understanding of what's "fact" generated by methods you trust. I think it's important to do this at a time when agreed-upon methodologies for figuring out what's "real" and what's "not" are heavily under attack (at least in the U.S.)--so wholly unqualified people argue about the fact-base underpinning arguments about evolution and global warming, to name a couple things rather than just admitting that other people with more background have a different opinion from them that they refuse to accept. In short, there's too much bs these days, and my response is not really about me dreaming as much as me fighting. 51 Prashant Kothari on May 2, 2005 3:57 AM Direct link "But one thing that I have noticed over and over... which is that anytime a bit out of the box and reformist view comes out of Islamic write/thinker their background is from India in someways. I think the cultural diversity in India could be a cause of this. I also think that the Indian Muslims will be the force for reason in the entire Islamic world." Not sure if this is connected but no Indian Muslim has been found among the Al-Qaeda cells -- lots of people from every country in West Asia, Pakistan, Indonesia.. but no Indians.. 52 Prashant Kothari on May 2, 2005 4:02 AM Direct link "i'd agree with you if her statements weren't made from the us or canada. if she were on a tour of pakistan or iran and went about "reforming" islam(excluding her political beliefs) i'd give her much respect" says anand. This has to be one of the most laughable claims I've come across.. Rusdie's fatwa sentencing is of course the most extreme example. In this, as in so many other instance, VSN was remarkably prescient -http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0375501185/102-0264431-2926524?v=glance

53 Al Mujahid on May 2, 2005 5:41 AM Direct link

Saurav and Razib, I also dont have any more respect for Gay Christians or Gay Jews. There are religions in the world which do not condemn homosexuality. So a better choice for religious minded queers would be to convert to one of the more tolerant religions instead of making 'creative' interpretations of Abrahamic faiths. I guess as I have gone from being a practicing Muslim to being a Non Muslim, I dont fully appreciate why some people continue to be Muslims and ending up making creating interpretations to justify their lifestyle. For people living in the West, it might be easier to just leave Islam. 54 Al Mujahid on May 2, 2005 5:43 AM Direct link blahblah. maybe I should just behead you ;) 55 IR on May 2, 2005 8:22 AM Direct link Btw, AM, kinda ironic that you're imposing your version of Islam, or whatever you make of Islam, on Irshad Manji, while hypocritically accusing her of doing the same to the Muslim mainstream. 56 IR on May 2, 2005 8:23 AM Direct link PS : Just to clarify, AM's version of Islam here being a queer-free one. 57 MD on May 2, 2005 8:46 AM Direct link Saurav - step away from the post-modern well and take a drink of 'real' water. Is it a 'fact' or a fact that water will make you wet? *Joke, joke, please take that in the light in which it was intended! I do enjoy your comments. 58 MD on May 2, 2005 8:49 AM Direct link Oh, and Saurav? I'm with you on respecting IM for being open about her sexuality. I think she is brave to be so honest. 59 razib@gnxp.com on May 2, 2005 1:55 PM Direct link Saurav and Razib, I also dont have any more respect for Gay Christians or Gay Jews. There are religions in the world which do not condemn homosexuality.

So a better choice for religious minded queers would be to convert to one of the more tolerant religions instead of making 'creative' interpretations of Abrahamic faiths. I guess as I have gone from being a practicing Muslim to being a Non Muslim, I dont fully appreciate why some people continue to be Muslims and ending up making creating interpretations to justify their lifestyle. For people living in the West, it might be easier to just leave Islam. well, though raised in a muslim family i've never really believed and have been an explicit atheist since i was 8, so to me all religions are (more or less) equally groundless . as a matter of practicality zen buddhism is less onerous to me that conservative christianity or normative islam (that is, islam as it is practiced by 90% of muslims), but all are grounded upon metaphysical or theistic assumptions i do not find myself agreeing with. so, is irshad manji's interpretation of Islam nonsensical? based on a "literal reading" of the Koran it is, but, i would argue that all the abrahamic religions are nonsensical based on a literal reading of their texts, you can find errors and confusions and contradictions in them all. so, if we are going to make gays/queers/homosexuals/tatoo artists/etc. examine the text and hold them to the standards or implications of that text we should do that for abrahamists as a whole. there are serious questions about the Nature of God and the Koran in islam that were "resolved" (at least in the sunni world) in the 10th century-but the very fact that those questions were mooted suggests that the Koran at its base is not nearly as clear and precise as its believers presume it to be. i would argue that the interpretation of the Koran, Bible, etc. is strongly culturally mediated . 100 years ago the Bible "naturally" justified white supremacy, but today Western Christians, Right to Left, would find the Bible as a wellspring for aracial universalism. there are many Christian literalists today who see in the Bible plain condemnation of racism, just as a generation ago they saw plain support for segregation. in other words, texts and dogmas are culturally mediated. my atheist side says "you are all rubes," but my practical/human side says that humans are humans and it is hard to judge what variables people are weighing in their head when they come to a particular decision.* on the specific point about homosexuals: there are obvious and explicit edicts against that sort of activity in the foundational texts, but, in the Bible god is clearly implied as lord of a flat earth, and the Nature of God as transmitted in the Koran offers up a lot of fissures that any philosophical mind could

slip in to to create havoc (Averroes ended up at the bizarre position of "two truths" as some of you know). so the difference is only one of degree, not kind, when it comes to the mental gymnastics that a Muslim conservative makes in his belief and practice and that that a queer must make. and i think even the difference of degree is to some extent a function of communal/historical consensus and not something axiomatic. p.s. can anyone else make a sense of my tendency to capitalize and not capitalize? i can't, so i'm giving up attempting to standardize. * AM, you yourself would be under severe sanction as an apostate in many Muslim traditions, but you have also asserted that your ties to Islam through family mean that you have to treat with Islam and attacks upon it even if you didn't want to. i think many queers feel the same way about fill-in-the-blank. 60 razib@gnxp.com on May 2, 2005 2:02 PM Direct link also, i do not mean to imply that religious "traditionalists" must accept queers (or any other group). i do find that some gay activists do behave as if other groups within their religious group need to "update" their interpretation to make room for them. that being said, i think the history of religion strongly suggests that change is quite likely possible if you wait long enough, so gay religionists are not fighting in vain (though they might not succeed for a while). 61 vurdlife on May 2, 2005 5:59 PM Direct link "http://www.muslimrefusenik.com"? Are you kidding? Talk about crass opportunism. Minority rightist du jour...*yawn*...next 62 Ikram on May 2, 2005 6:27 PM Direct link Wow, a Manji fest. I guess the Americans have discovered her. Irshad is old news in Canada. She was a hotshot leftist Lesbian Feminist in the 1990s (yes, being a Lesbian Feminist is a career in itself!). She was also the host of the TVOntario show 'Ideas' for a few years. From what I remember of her, she was an extreme example of a condescending leftist identity-politics intellectual (and Canada has a lot of those). Quite obnoxious.

After 9-11, she made the same journey Christopher Hitchens did, but Manjified. She is now a professional Lesbian Muslim feminist. At this pace, in 2015, she'll be a Lesbian Muslim Vegetarian Feminist, and in 2025 a Lesbian Muslim Vegetarian Objectivist Feminist. Along with Tarek Fattah, she founded the Muslim Canadian Congress to represent 'progressive' Muslims and to act as a counterpoint to CAIR Canada and the Canadian Islamic Congress. However, she broke with Fattah and tnd the MCC gang after her book was published. Fattah is an ordinary liberal Muslim Desi, hostile to religion but faithful to pro-Palestinianism (similar to Haroon Siddiqui of the Toronto Star). Before 911 Manji had no connection with Islam. Afterwards, she engaged in what she describes as a "2 year intensive study", which culminated in her book. To be honest, I'm not sure why she wants to be a Muslim. She doesn't believe in the inerrancy of the Quran, she doesn't pray five times a day, and her beliefs seem to amount to an airy 'spirituality' with no focus. Why not be Buddhist or Wiccan? Naturally, she has a lot of critics. The most cogent criticism I have read came from Sheema Khan (the best muslim op-ed writer in Canada), and can be found on Manji's website (which is a credit to Manji). I'm more sympathetic than Khan is. Manji is mostly harmless. And it's damn hard being a Lesbian Muslim Feminist (I don't speak from personal experience, of course). And who cares if she hearts Ariel Sharon. She's about as influential on middle-east politics as Whitney Houston and Bobby Brown. But since the book came out, I've been very dissapointed with Manji. On the important issues on Islam and Canada, like binding arbitration and Sharia, or gay marriage, or subsidies for religious schools, Manji has been silent. Rather than focusing her efforts on where she could really make a difference -- by creating progressive, if idiosyncratic, Canadian Muslim institutions -- she's chosen to bolster he personal celebrity. I suppose she could argue that by taking the Manji show global, she's making a difference in Sudan and Saudi, where Muslim refusniks need more help than in suburban Toronto. But I think she's

deluding herself if she thinks the Lesbian Muslim gospel will find adherents in Sialkot or Sidon. She should speak out where she can make a difference. In any case, there are more influential speakers for progressive Muslims in Canada thatn the globetrotting Manji. Fattah, who's been fighting against headscarves and binding arbitration. Or hijabi twenty-something NDP candidate Itrath Syed, who bravely came out in favour of gay-marriage in the last election, and took a lot of crap from conservatives for it. Or the folks who brought Tariq Ramadan to Ottawa last month. There are real progressives who are also Muslims working on issues that matter to real people. Manji, like the pope-fighting Hitchens, is good light entertainment; not to be confused with the real thing. 63 Ikram on May 2, 2005 8:18 PM Direct link Ok, I read the Tucker Carlson transcript. This bit is really stupid Even though the Koran says that no matter which way you turn, east or west, there is the face of god, why are we told that the only direction in which we can pray, when we do pray, is the direction of Mecca? Of all the issues to champion, she chooses this? I liked her anti-anti-semitism bit though. (I had no idea Tucker Carlson was back on TV. Is he still hurting America? Did he ever respond to Jon Stewart? Or is this show an attempt at penance?) 64 Somya on May 7, 2005 2:32 PM Direct link Am I the only Indian American here who actually agress with Dinesh D'Souza on most accounts? He came here, liked what he saw, and stayed. Is that unlike most of us here? Sure, America has problems (which place doesn't?), but it seems we are benefitting from the place alot more than we are suffering from it. And at any rate.... we all know we have another "home" we can go back to at any time, right? So how come none of us are going? 65 Muslim Indian on July 18, 2005 1:08 PM Direct link

The trouble with Irshad is that instead of creating her own religion she just decides to hijack another to gain maximum popularity and dollars. It is inconceivable that shes a Muslim. Ive yet to meet a Muslim who thinks and says otherwise. She is an embarassment to the Muslims especially those from India. We Muslims of India have nothing whatsoever with cheap gay trash like her. 66 A N N A on July 18, 2005 1:16 PM Direct link cheap gay trash like her you can state your dislike for a person, your disareement with whom or how they love and your opinion on their character without resorting to shit like this. just a thought. 67 Raza on August 22, 2005 4:38 PM Direct link I found Irshads book The Trouble with Islam thought provoking but also somewhat hectoring and proselytising I guess she is north American though. For all Irsahds good work at pointing out things that Muslims need to start addressing which I agree with such as misogyny, terrorism, anti Semitism and homophobia she does make a lot of sweeping generalisations about Muslims from her own experiences which arent necessarily true for all or even the majority of Muslims, e.g. she claims that all the Muslims in Uganda beat their black servants. Irshad needs more balance. Whilst I agree with some of her religious analysis, her political analysis was incredibly naive. Western imperialism might not always have the same observable callousness as Islamic fundamentalism (although it is worth remembering the slave trade, the building of the Suez canal by western powers which cost hundreds of thousands of Muslim lives, the fact that the worst famine in India's history costing millions of lives happened as a result of Britain's dogmatic adherance to the free market system which she seems such an uncritical champion of) but it does affect and screw up quite as many (if not more) lives than Islamic fundamentalism. I'm not for Islamic fundamentalism at all (being gay and apostate) but let's not have a love affair with western imperialism either. Open both your eyes Irshad not just one of them! Particularly appalling was Irsahds love affair with the U.S.A, the country which has so much contributed to all that's wrong in the Muslim world - by supporting the taliban, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and now religious fundamentalists in Iraq, a country it has blown to pieces and is

now making a lot of money from rebuilding. Oh and don't forget the Halliburton oil pipelines..... Irshad does not deal with any of these points! Remember that the USA was built on the attempted genocide of the indigenous American Indians. What does that tell you about American values? We all need to get beyond the binary way of seeing the world of Islam VS the West in which you have to side with one or the other. Unfortunately I often found Irshad every bit as crass and ill-informed as the idiot village mullahs she so derides. 68 hasan on September 1, 2006 10:29 AM Direct link I dont know much about Manji but from what i have been reading on this page: "According to Ms. Manji, more or less every arab/muslim man has deeply held, positive views on wifebeating, suicide bombings, enforcement of "fatwas", and on and on, but will publicly denounce these views when questioned by a westerner. nevertheless, according to her these are core values that are dear to even the most common muslim." I can relate her to Ayun Hariri of Netherland. She blamed her old primitive african customs on islam and called herself an ex-muslim. Even in Pakistan we have old customs more or less indian as we share a common history but these customs are not pronounced by islam they are there and we still follow them. The problem with this lady is that she is seeing the world with someone else's eyes and speaking in a foreign language. I dont think this will affect muslims as these sort of characters have been used by other religions for a long time and will die out with the passage of time. 69 Cyrus on February 14, 2007 8:20 PM Direct link I do not think Irshad Manji is half Egyptian, as this has not mentioned until recently. This could very well be a not-so-clever fabrication of sorts, to increase her rather limited credibility as anything more than the South Asian version of Danial Pipes or Robert Spencer... 70 human on June 2, 2007 12:24 AM Direct link Irshad Manji's ideas have become so threatening to the the Muslim world because she forces Muslims to look hard at their own hypocrytical double-standards. Many Muslims educate themselves in the western world, and enjoy all the freedoms the west has to offer, but ultimately root for their

motherland - which in itself is an illusion. Why? If the west is such a terrible place, why are they here? If the west is so corrupt,immoral and tolerant of homosexuality, why do they bring up their children in such an awful place? You see, if the western governments were just as racist and intolerant as the ones in the middle east, Muslims would never be here in the first place. Never. So it is only in such a "corrupt" and "morally bankrupt" society that Muslims will be accepted - that Muslims will be allowed to live in peace, to pursue their goals in freedom, and also to criticize the west without being stonned or jailed. Irshad Manji speaks the truth...that must be so upsetting to you. 71 John Coelho on December 12, 2007 1:52 AM Direct link Irshad is a heroine to me and millions. She is brave beyond belief. And, above all, she is a truth teller. Without truth we all perish. 72 Unimpressed on September 9, 2008 8:30 PM Direct link "Human" and other supporters of Irshad are only fooling and exposing themselves as the narrow minded morons that they are by supporting a charlatan like Irshad Manji. Brave? Courageous? By repeating the same old Zionist bullshit line we've been hearing in the West for decades? By supporting the war in Iraq? By supporting Israeli terrorism and occupation against the Palestinian people? By supporting Yankee terrorism all over the world? Thats not courage, its called being a sycophant. Now we find it she was NEVER a Muslim, but a non-practicing Ismaili who got into the religion reformation racket post 9/11....and look who's made millions since. "Human," you're a shallow minded hypocrite and liar...and deep down you know it. 73 heavenlyspot on September 29, 2008 9:16 PM Direct link John Coelho said Irshad is a heroine to me and millions. She is brave beyond belief. And, above all, she is a truth teller. Without truth we all perish. Thats true, humanity is doomed to perish without truth, but much to our dismay, she isn't being truthful. Infact, there are many Muslims who openly condemn extremism and violence in every form, however, she goes a step further to justify US invasions in the Middle East.

It may be difficult for you to comprehend this situation, because you're not Muslim, but when an individual supports the killing of innocent civilians whom are his/her people, it can be difficult for the rest of us to support that individual. 74 Eesa Abdullah on November 14, 2008 5:51 AM Direct link This article is so unprofessional and disgusting that not even the name of the alleged 'professor' who were are, I guess, meant to assume is a pious Muslim, is not even given. You crooked women should be ashamed of yourselves. 75 asma siddiqua sayed on December 6, 2008 5:10 AM Direct link I read the comments to your post with a lot of interest. I come from a fairly conservative religious Indian Muslim family. But that had never stopped my grandmothers and grandfathers from both sides of my family (my parents are from completely different backgrounds and cities) to have been schooled and university educated. At the same time, we followed quite strictly our religion. And when I look at people like Irshad Manji, I am shocked, because that is in no way the Islam I know and the islam that my ancestors have been following. Wife-beating, atrocities on women etc, are not because of Islam. Its common knowledge that men exert their physical strength on women and abuse them. It has nothing to do with religious beliefs. If a Hindu or a Christian man tortures his wife, why isn't that behaviour attributed to be because of a flaw in his religion. Is there any verse/scriptire in those religions saying that women should not be abused ? I doubt. I can understand the media's craze with giving bad press to Islam after terrorism. But there are many many families like mine where women have been highly educated because it was Prophet Muhammed 's (pbuh) instruction to educate women. The trouble is that a large majority of the Muslim population around the world is poor. Very poor. They have no access to any kind of opportunity that would lift them out of their poverty and achieve greater heights. Wife beating is one of the worst crimes but one that is not sanctioned in islam. These are very typical of cultural behaviour. Its ingrained in human society. Covering heads is not an oppressive thing. Allah instructs women to wear outer garments when we venture out of our homes so that we may not be molested. I'm a girl and I have seen the difference when I cover my head, and when I don't. I feel safer because there are fewer comments passed on

me on the road, and not many would dare to touch you. Maybe they keep away because I look visibly Muslim, but I would prefer to be safe. The fact is that the world is not safe for women, and there is nothing wrong in Muslim women protecting ourselves. If someone would argue that women are raped in Muslim countries, its because of the man who is the kind of vile man he is, not because of Islam. If he were to follow even a bit of islam, he would know that it is not permissible to even touch a strange woman or look at her lewdly. All I can say is that I am very disappaointed by the kind of image Irshad Manji and her ilk portray of Islam. I agree that there is a lot of more freedom and a better life outside Muslim countries, and its a very sad fact, and one I feel owes to its origins in political Islam and religious fanaticism.

I don't know why the article mentioned her spiked hair. Is that a sign of secularism and modernism ? Islam isn't against women stylign their hair. Lots of practicing Muslim women I know have spiked highlighted hair though it never shows under their scarves. I don't know why she came out with a book on Islam when in all probability she has based her claims on lives of Muslim families she has only seen and experienced from afar. There is always a point in your life where you struggle with your religion, but that does not mean, you go and criticize a religion which you haven't followed or even tried to follow. She was an Ismaili Muslim (not currently an Ismaili as I have read), a sect of Shia Islam who follow Islam in a very different manner, as in, not exactly from the Quran. You cannot take an example of the actions of a few Muslims and say that they represent Islam. 76 Nirmal on September 24, 2009 1:07 AM Direct link I know sum1 who is half desi half Arab. Great mix. He's a great person.very respectful. If we gotta mix, it should be with more Arab lok -they r closer to our culture n have more respect for our ways than the west.