Crowning Ms Beautiful Morals

04:02 PM May 08, 2009

RIYADH (Saudi Arabia) - Ms Sukaina Al Zayer is an unlikely beauty queen hopeful. She covers her face and body in black robes and an Islamic veil, so no one can tell what she looks like. She also admits she is a little on the plump side.

But at Saudi Arabia’s only beauty pageant, the judges do not care about a perfect figure or face. What they are looking for in the quest for “Miss Beautiful Morals” is the contestant who shows the most devotion and respect for her parents.

“The idea of the pageant is to measure the contestants’ commitment to Islamic morals... It’s an alternative to the calls for decadence in the other beauty contests that only take into account a woman’s body and looks,” said pageant founder Khadra Al Mubarak.

Pageant hopefuls will also spend a day at a country house with their mothers, where they will be observed by female judges and graded on how they interact with their mothers.

The Miss Beautiful Morals pageant, now in its second year, is the latest example of conservative Muslims co-opting Western-style formats to spread their message in the face of the onslaught of foreign influences flooding the region through the Internet and television. AP

From TODAY, World – Friday, 08-May-2009

Director accuses Vatican

Not much hype compared to its predecessor, this movie from the book with the same title, I say that Dan Brown has lost his appeal, not only to the readers, but to the moviegoers as well. As with much noise and commotion, when the sound has faded, and the air is cleared, everything settles into their proper places… we then see the clear and real picture.

I saw the The Da Vinci Code movie, and I can't call it a movie. It was a crap, at the least. It was simply like a literal translation of the book. Maybe it really is. Think so?

-----

ANGELS & DEMONS

ROME — Director Ron Howard claimed on Sunday that the Vatican interfered with efforts to get permits to shoot certain scenes of his Angels & Demons religious thriller in Rome — a charge the Vatican said was purely a publicity stunt.

Angels & Demons combines an ancient secret brotherhood called the Illuminati, a papal conclave and a high-tech weapon threatening to destroy the Vatican.

Howard said he hadn't sought cooperation from the Vatican based on the opposition he encountered filming The Da Vinci Code, another Brown novel that angered many Catholic leaders.

But he said the Vatican nevertheless exerted influence regarding his filming permits, and he was told it would not be possible even to shoot scenes in Rome that had churches in the background.

"When you come to film in Rome, the official statement to you is that the Vatican has no influence," he said. "Everything progressed very smoothly, but unofficially a couple of days before we were to start filming in several of our locations, it was explained to us through back channels and so forth that the Vatican had exerted some influence."

Angels & Demons features Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon, played by Tom Hanks. In the film, the Vatican turns to Langdon after the Illuminati kidnap four cardinals considered front-runners to be the next pope, and threaten to kill one, every hour and then explode a bomb in the Vatican.

Last summer, Rome's diocese confirmed it had barred producers from filming inside two churches because the movie didn't conform to the church's views. AP

From TODAY, Plus – Tuesday, 05-May-2009

Related articles by Zemanta

• 'Angels & Demons' Director Blasts Vatican (abcnews.go.com)
• 'Angels & Demons' director says Vatican interfered (ctv.ca)
• Ron Howard tussles with Vatican over film (msnbc.msn.com)
• Angels & Demons tussle continues (thestar.com)
• Vatican 'hampered new Hanks film' (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Ron Howard accuses Pope of scuppering Dan Brown movie (theregister.co.uk)
• Vatican weighs calling for boycott against Angels and Demons film (guardian.co.uk)
• How film flouted Vatican ban (guardian.co.uk)

We’re equals, not doubles

On some points, I agree with the writer… two becoming one doesn't necessarily mean enslaving or dominating or dissolving the other person completely; the unity is simply more than just what we perceive. There is more to a person than what we see or hear. The unspoken and unheard, the unuttered and unannounced, the hushed… when becoming one means being one in thought, but not in the execution, one in mind, but not in the action… one in emotion, but different in the presentation or display of affection…

-----

btw: ON DIFFERENCES IN A RELATIONSHIP

ANA OW

MY HUSBAND cannot see the light – when it comes to the styles of furnishings and fixtures that I prefer for our new apartment, that is.

D and I have been shopping for pendant lights over the past few weekends and the number of items that we both like are a dismal few.

"Sorry, but we are not having a pseudo-baroque chandelier in our bedroom," was D's last word on the matter after a couple of minor spats. He did, however, concede to the funky bronze lamps for the dining room that I picked out.

Despite the trouble it entails, I am glad for these differences of opinion. It means that we are still individuals and that in getting married, we have not morphed into a single entity – which is what I must say many Singapore couples I know tend to be or strive to become (yuck!).

I know of a woman who joins every single Facebook group her boyfriend does. She has even changed her style of dressing to suit his and mimics his speech, artistic preferences and even socio-political opinions.

I think it is sad when two people come together and one defers to the personality of the other by erasing her own.

There's no fear of that happening to D and me. We are both stubborn as hell and it takes a lot to change each other's minds. There are, however, times when he wins me over after a long battle of wits.

What's fascinating is that such conversations force me to clarify my beliefs, reflect on why I hold them in the first place and see if there is any room for manoeuvre.

Having an individual voice (and making sure it is heard) is something which I value greatly and believe to be important in an equal partnership – never mind that it may invite my significant other to challenge my opinions.

I welcome the debate – it is evidence that I'm not married to a block of wood.

To me, opposites attract and to reach a compromise and common ground despite having differences is part of an exciting and enriching life together.

D, despite being 11 years younger than me, has never been afraid of making his opinions known. While he is often keen to try out new experiences and activities that I especially enjoy, ultimately, he will decide for himself whether or not he really likes or wants something that I have suggested.

D would sooner wax his legs than accompany me to watch an art-house film, but would gladly book a French restaurant of my choice for my birthday dinner because he now appreciates the food.

Similarly, while I have tried to understand his love for comics, I would much rather read a real book. Having said that, I'm currently enjoying some of his favourite novels from the Twilight series by Stephenie Meyer.

Yet when it comes to relationships, there are some things that definitely warrant an agreement from both parties involved.

You've got to see eye to eye, for example, on whether or not to get married.

The decision to have children, the number of kids in a family and how to manage shared finances are areas in which a couple must share the same goals.

Differences in opinion may exist, but common ground has to be forged if the relationship is to work.

For D and myself, raising our baby son, K, is an issue which we are eager to get right together. Altercations aside, we would do everything and more to have K know that his parents love and support him, no matter what.

So, when it comes to sofas and light fixtures, I don't mind if D doesn't share my taste. Especially when I know that where it counts the most, we are both on the same page.

myp@sph.com.sg

From myPaper, My Lifestyle – Tuesday, 05-May-2009