Letters to the Editor
-
Nice Improvements to the VBlog Format
This was much better done than the simple "talking head in the middle of the screen" approach that seemed so pervasive.
If you're going to keep up with these things, please take the cues from this. Editing, other images, etc.
Well done!
-
Billiams out-clevers Billiams
Billiams, Tracy Clark-Flory isn't cleverly avoiding the issue of violence against women. Canada has laws against murder, domestic violence, abuse etc. These laws apply equally whether women or men are the victims, and regardless of anyone's religion or culture. Canadians and Americans and Salon readers are all united in their hope that these laws protect as many women as possible, and if anybody has a better idea about how to protect people from violence their contribution would be received warmly.
She didn't avoid the issue, because there isn't one.
-
Smell the hypocrisy
when I flick on the tube and see Hillary or Christiane Amanpour wrap their heads in $1500 Hermes scarfs in order to fit in with skimask assholes and the mother of the latest suicide bomber as they ululate and screech how some American and/or Jew is committing genocide. And those same people come home and have the fucking gaul to preach to westerners how that same posing is oppression. Please bang your worthless heads against the wall until the white matter comes out.
-
My Grandmother Wore One
Only she called it a Bubushka. Most others called it a "Scarf." She wore a Babushka almost every time she went out. Right here in the US of A.
In fact, weren't there scarfs all over the place? Some thin and fit in little plastic carriers? Some thicker? In all sort of colors, sometimes with little designs, or glittery threads?
She wasn't forced into it. It was just her choice and came from how she was raised.
That is the difference. No one should be forced to wear a Babushka. I myself, have not chosen to carry on the tradition.
-
That Reader is Righ
Feminists only care about western 'patriarchy' because it directly benefits them in terms of job/money/etc.
-
Okay, who is being the western cultural whaducallit in this arguement ...
This entire arguement is based on an incredible false premise:
There are no Muslim feminists
WRONG!
Women's rights are human rights, and, astonishingly, some humans who are NOT in the western world have managed to figure out for themselves with their perfectly good non-western brains that oppressive tribal customs are oppressive tribal customs.
You'd be shocked, yes SHOCKED to know, that there are Eastern European feminists and Asian feminists and even (no!) AFRICAN feminists!!!!!
(OMG! You mean there are feminists who aren't WHITE MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS??? Say it aint so!!!!)
The Muslim world has been an economic and cultural backwater for oh, maybe 400 years give or take, but before that they were well ahead of the west in terms of everything from science to human rights to bathing. Give them time and they'll pull out of their anti-modernity soup.
But in the meanwhile, anyone who cares about human rights at all should stop finger pointing, and stop handwringing about political correctness and ask the Muslim feminists what they need, how we can help *THEM* affect change.
-
I'll recommend this book once more
"The Tragedy of Afghanistan" by Pakistani socialist Raja Anwar.
Anwar gives a detailed account of the economic forces that have acted to preserve patriarchal tribal rule in rural Afghanistan.
He also gives a detailed accounting of how and why the officially feminist socialist government that took power in 1973 failed to make any major progress in convincing the tribal people to forsake their tribal ways and take part in a modern socialist economy.
Those bungled attempts to force Afghanistan away from patriarchal tribalism did more than just fail. They sparked a civil conflict that eventually brought in the Red Army and turned Bin Laden from a playboy into a terrorist.
Anwar's book could serve as a warning on how NOT to confront patriarchal tribalism in the developing world.
-
Speaking of feminist hypocrisy
Speaking of feminist hypocrisy, why does use the Salon logo in PINK for Broadsheet?
-
@Nulla Sullus
And those same people come home and have the fucking gaul to preach to westerners
Really? I'm sure any French readers - you know, the people that live in GAUL - would object to your sneering remark. But then, who cares about them? They're only French.
*eyeroll* Really, I wouldn't expect such a sophisticated commenter to let a typo as clumsy as that slip by.
-
Allegedly? What's with the allegedly bullshit?
Is there any doubt at all that the father killed the daughter?
Why do you let lawyers force you into being all "allegedly" over a known murderer when everyday you refuse to let science or common suggest you treat men with more fairness and respect?
Atrios tells me that allegedly Micky Kaus blows goats to which I add that allegedly you procure them for him.
Some people say...
-
Cowardly vlog, you looked far too cute in your stripes which distracted me from your argument. Had you been wearing a hijab, I would have been able to concentrate on your argument better
Please TCF, you need to vlog in a hijab if you want us to concentrate on what you are actually saying. It would be more empowering for you that way.
-
I guess the issue wasn't clear--at least to very clever gadgiiberibimba
The issue is rather simple: That is, forcing a woman to wear a hijab, particularly via murder, violence and threats thereof is to be condemned. Whether murder is already a crime in Canada wasn't germane to this point -- it was the motivation behind this murder and others that I was speaking to before. Moreover, there are many places where such use of force to impose the hijab and other wardrobe practices upon women are at least de facto legal. My position is it shouldn't be.
As for the woman who would never want such practices forces upon her, but does not support forcibly liberating women in tribal societies from such privations of liberty, I see that as at least relevant to whether the practice of forcing hijabs upon women is to be condemned. As for forcibly liberating women from such practices, that is a mouthful. I don't think condemning a practice entails using military force, if that is what you meant. But, if there are women who in fact resist wearing this apparel, supporting this choice seems consistent feminist principles as well as principles of human rights more broadly speaking, The fact that there is resistance to this practice internally in these societies, this is what provides the impetus for forcible action against these women, attests to both the fact that the the societies are not as homogeneous with respect to the hijab as your response suggests and that these women who resistant these traditions are like you, employing a cultural norm that makes them feel just as oppressed by such requirements as you would.
Now, especially in mixed, westernizing societies will this lead to anomie and chaos? Doubtful. Much of the reactionary extreme versions of Islam are new developments, and thus don't seem to qualify as lychpins of society without which such cultures would fall into ruin. The are rather reactionary and oppressive developments which attack the basic rights of women in these societies. Throwing acid in the face of non-hijab wearers,raping them, and murdering them is not a defensible cultural norm. It is an atrocity.