Those who have denounced Nawaz for his strip club visit are not usually so concerned for women's rights
Can you be a feminist and visit a strip club?
That is the question some people are asking after footage obtained by the Daily Mail showed Maajid Nawaz, the Lib Dem candidate for Hampstead and Kilburn and co-founder of the Quilliam Foundation, on camera allegedly harassing a dancer in a strip club.
The Mail has described Maajid as a married father-of-one, but it is worth pointing out that he was not married at the time. His child is from a previous marriage. He got married in October and the ‘stag do’ took place in July. His wife, Rachel Maggart, took to Twitter to defend her husband and said she was fully aware of his actions.
Yesterday Maajid took to Twitter again to blast the ‘hatchet job’ against him.
It would seem as if a Muslim can own and manage a strip club, just cannot visit one. The club owner Abdul Malik said he wanted the video to be seen by the public because of the way Nawaz portrays himself as a feminist and a family man:
“He’s always talking about religion on TV and I thought, what a hypocrite,” he said.
Mr Malik claimed ‘arrogant’ Nawaz acted like a ‘spokesman for Islam’ but visited the club during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
Thank goodness we had Mr Malik defending the honour of Islam and the dancers in his club. So concerned was he that he waited nine months before speaking out. The timing of this story is very suspicious. Why wait until now to release the video footage unless the intention was to damage Maajid’s political campaign?
Maajid has openly said he is a ‘non devout Muslim‘ and he has said on several occasions that there are no spokespeople for Muslims. But he does still identify as a Muslim. As a friend of mine told me upon hearing of the scandal:
“You can never escape the Islam police. Like being caught with a Marlboro light as a teenager by a friend of your third cousin’s neighbour. And suddenly it’s all around the community that you are a chain smoking junkie. Its that – amplified.”
Whatever you think about strip clubs, it was very stupid of Maajid to have gone to one, and in East London of all places. He is fighting an election; he should have known better and he has handed a gift to his enemies on a plate.
His spokesperson said he denied touching the dancer ‘inappropriately’ and added that his reputation for advocating women’s rights was ‘in the context of Islamic extremism’. What does that mean? This needs clarifying.
The frustrating part of the strip club controversy is the hypocrisy. Maajid’s enemies are suddenly declaring ‘concern’ for the vulnerable women in the sex industry and discussing issues of consent.
Yet some of these are the same people who, for example, would not challenge the Muslim scholars who refuse to condemn domestic violence or female genital mutilation. The same people who were happy to blame Western culture for the groomers who sexually abused and exploited children. Any woman who does not conform to their standard of Islamic modesty are treated with contempt.
Take Dilly Hussain, deputy editor of 5 Pillars, who has been enjoying the drama unfold. He was exposed last year for comments towards a blogger of Muslim origin whose timeline he stalked, then copied and pasted pictures of her (which had been edited) with the words ‘pisshead, drunken liberal garbage’. He also apparently views Ahmadi Muslims as lower than monkeys.
Opinion is divided over this story. Some deem it not to be newsworthy because visiting a strip club is what most men do – what’s the big deal? – and others, including Tory Nadine Dorries, have called for Maajid to resign.
I’ll be honest – Maajid’s behaviour has really disappointed me; I expected better from him. Perhaps that is my own issue, because I place too much faith in people and will inevitably be let down when they fail to live up to my (impossibly high?) standards.
At the end of the day, though, it is up to the public to make up their own minds over this story. Those who support Maajid can only hope that the accusations of harassment are revealed to be tabloid sensationalism. I doubt this will make much difference to his chances in Hampstead and Kilburn, as the odds of him winning that seat were slim anyway.
But has it damaged his reputation in the long run? Maajid’s work is indispensable; it would be a shame if this were to distract us from the good work he has done.
Iram Ramzan is a freelance journalist. Follow her on Twitter
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
60 Responses to “The hypocrisy of Maajid Nawaz’s critics is hard to swallow”
Ray
Great piece. If Maajid Nawaz had taken a 9 year old as a second wife, would the muslims having a field day over his stag-do antics be just as critical?
Penfold187
I have to say, Maajid was foolish to place himself in this position. But he has committed no grave offence, in his actions. He has NEVER claimed to be anything other than a vocal advocate for positive change within his community. He has and continues to take a reasoned and passionate stance of matters of faith and belief, while not being aggressive or nasty. More than can be said of many of, his more pious opponents.
Sheen
what a sad story and even a sadder analysis ! media and the left/right establishment have worked hard to portray this hypocrite as the role model for ‘moderate Islam’ … an It appears sister Iram is not bothered with his act in the Night club but is sorry ‘his good work’ on counter radicalisation might be forgotten ! Now we know the ultimate criteria to rehabilitate a Muslim extremist : get drunk and visit a night club !…
Matthew Blott
She says she’s disappointed. But visiting a strip joint is hardly the biggest sin in the world.
Mark
Assuming that the owner, Abdul Malik is actually a Muslim, this was the stand-out point in the Daily Mail article. How can he moan about a Muslim visiting “during Ramadan” when he owns the club and has it open during that time? Also, does anyone know if Jay Shah (the manager) is Muslim? Hypocrisy number one.
I’ve worked in the City and once or twice went to one of those clubs, but never did one of those “private dances”, but what I have heard is that it’s very full-on and I suppose you either sit there terrified and unable to move (like I would), or you don’t. Whatever the case, Nawaz obviously had a moment of “misjudgement” given his public position. But no crime was committed. If anything untoward had happened, he’d have been chucked out, but he wasn’t. On one of our Christmas party trips, a colleague had to wear a pair of pants outside his trousers as a “punishment”. Cue a very big man asking us to leave because of that!
And then the hypocrisy number two of most who went on the attack, given their past mumblings as you point out. It really all stinks of a vendetta, and not much more.
And so he had a drink (apparently). That *might* be haraam as written, but I bet there’s a lot of hypocrisy in that as well. During the Tower Hamlets voting debacle, Ken Livingstone, on LBC, defended mayor Lutfur Rahman, by pointing out he was a “nice bloke” who had a drink at dinner. I doubt Rahman appreciated that, but no fuss there.
Nawaz’s “crime” is to be secular, but still be a Muslim. This is very much along the lines of all the Jewish kids I grew up with, who were partial to a bacon sarnie, and today are still “Jewish” (two married to non-Jewish women) but never went near the orthodoxy, apart from having a bar mitzvah. It’s entirely possible to do this, not a crime, and the orthodoxy should leave people like that alone.
For me, Nawaz made a bit of a mistake, but it makes him that much more “normal.” (!)