While undertaking lesson planning for her class, a Wellington primary school teacher spotted a deeply offensive reference in a textbook.
The book she had found among the school’s resources for mathematics curriculum support was Figure It Out Number Book One for Level 2.
It was published for the Ministry of Education by Learning Media Limited in Wellington under the series editorship of Susan Roche and the editor was Kirsty Farquharson. Its ISBN number is 0 478 27371 1. The copyright is held by the Crown, i.e., the legal entity representing the state of New Zealand. The book is also available online for teachers to use as a resource.

On page 13, a dark-skinned man named Jamal is building a pig pen. The implication is clear. Jamal is one of the most popular Muslim names. Jamal keeps pigs.

One of the facts about Muslims that many non-Muslims know is that Muslims do not eat pigs in any way, shape or form. They are forbidden (haram).
The teacher’s suspicion was therefore that the name Jamal had been chosen deliberately as an insult to Muslims, especially since the pig farmer is named four times on that page.
She got in touch with barrister Brian Henry, a long-time ally of the Muslim community in New Zealand.
He immediately wrote to Race Relations Commissioner Meng Foon, Minister of Education Chris Hipkins and Secretary for Education Iona Holsted pointing out how offensive this is to Muslims and demanding action.
“My clients, and I agree, consider this publication is the result of a deliberate act,” he wrote. “It is another example of Islamophobia in its extreme.”
Someone acted quickly at the Ministry because soon afterwards, the name in the online version of the book had been changed to James.
However, that begs a question. How many hard copies of this book are still to be found in schools across New Zealand?
It is easy to imagine a scenario in which a Muslim student, a young boy named Jamal, could be made fun of by his classmates: “So Jamal, you Muslims keep pigs!”
Once again, a Muslim – in this case, a young boy – would be put on the back foot having to explain and justify a core tenet of his religion. And all because someone let this offensive reference slip under the radar.
Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *