Tag Archives: misogyny

Meena

Posted on by

Meena sits in a chair.

“My brother used to tell me that the place for a woman is either at home or in the grave”, she says. “My brother told me to carry out a suicide attack.”

“They attached a bomb to my [9 years old] sister Nahida.” A single tear runs down her face. “She told my brother the bomb was heavy and she could not walk. He said she would be comfortable once she was sitting down in the car. I heard my sister saying: ‘Where is Meena? I want to see her.’ But I didn’t have the strength. My heart couldn’t take it. My mother fainted when they put her in the car.”

Meena is 13.

Her brother, a Taliban.

Newsflash: Gender segregation is stupid!

Posted on by

So the UK Universities really, actually, truly, no-joking-about-it, you-gotta-be-kidding-me did consider segregating sexes during lectures. And now they are taking a well-deserved beating for this stupidity.

What had happened? In a fit of decidedly non-egalitarian, but drop-dead stupidity, they considered segregating classes in UK’s universities to accommodate deeply religious muslims who may feel offended by non-segregated classes. It seems that UKU thinks that everyone should relinquish personal freedom so that a tiny minority of deeply religious people don’t have to relinquish their sexist custom. Enabling these inflexible people to attend all lectures must be important. Because everyone knows that it was close adherence to religion that has contributed most to our sciences in the past millennium.

I can just imagine the vista of such a lecture; the professor details the importance of equality, personal freedom and sexual non-discrimination. The class before her: divided by sex. Oh, and a deeply religious christian faction in the back protesting the sex of their professor by holding up a sign: ‘Tim 2:12 – I do not permit a woman to teach’

Bravo, UKU. [cue extremely unimpressed slow-clap]

It is stupidity like this that universities should battle, instead of supporting it.

Religions are being discriminated against!

Posted on by

CNN has published a list of the world’s 10 most dangerous terrorists. That list is an outrage:

  • All members are Islamic. No Christian, Jew, Sikh – not even a Jehova Witness! And we all know how those Watchtower Goons terrorize Bus Terminals and Railway Stations all across the nation! But no, only the Islamists get mentioned. Why is that? This list discriminates against other beliefs.
  • Male only. No woman is mentioned, not even in a Runner-up list. This in spite of the fact that there are some well known female terrorists that have much cooler names – like for example the White Widow. This list is typically misogynic westerner fare.
  • Territorial bias. Everyone on the list originates from, or lives in, the middle east/asia. We have great terrorists all around the world! Did everyone just forget Carlos, the ETA or IRA? Isn’t it enough that the Saudis have all the oil?

We can’t let this stand. We must remove the dominance of Islam on this list! Petition your representative at the UN to stop this gross injustice. Advocate a 10 point agenda for religions, continents and women to have at least 2 individuals in the top three each. And screw the math!

We must stop the dominance of Islamist terror.

Men being men

Posted on by

In Turkey, the lover of a local politician was fined more than USD 30’000 because she broke up the marriage of the politician and his wife. The politician was found not guilty – because he was only doing what men do.

This is reminiscent of Sharia law that knows only two verdicts: ‘not guilty’ and ‘woman’.

Archbishop proves he’s never had good sex

Posted on by

Ah, bishops. The unending wellspring of good examples. Good examples of what not to do. Today’s exhibit comes from the Twin Cities, where Catholic Archbishop John Nienstedt makes an archass out of himself.

During a meeting with Catholic leaders last August, the perhaps most revered, but definitely not very bright Archbishop thundered righteously:

“Sodomy, abortion, contraception, pornography, the redefinition of marriage and the denial of objective truth are just some of the forces threatening the stability of our civilization. The source of these machinations is none other than the Father of Lies.”

Wow. Sodomy, abortion, contraception, pornography, and homosexuality all in one sentence!

We better take this apart because it seems impossible to pack more misses into a single line:

  • denouncing sodomy merely proves that he’s never had good sex
  • railing against contraception is medically dangerous and highly misogynic
  • denying abortions is even more misogynic
  • attacking homosexuals is pure, unadulterated hate mongering (here disguised as ‘redefinition of marriage’)
  • vilifying porn is just plain silly – what is it with these uptight old men who think sex and morals are somehow linked?

Yet, his ‘denial of objective truth’ takes the cake. Objectively, gods don’t exist – they only do in this priest’s subjective imagination. More to the point, it’s his priestly job to deny objective truth. Taken in the context of his own speech, that means he’s either denouncing himself, or admitting that he’s working for his ‘Prince of Lies’.

Sometimes I feel there’s an unofficial contest between men of the cloth to find out who can pack the greatest amount of stupid into a single sentence.

It’s difficult being a priest

Posted on by

A discussion about religious morals made me look at the actions of priests who recently exhibited somewhat questionable behavior: fire someone for converting to a different belief, lie to their flock, preach hate, or discriminate against women and homosexuals.

In all these cases we can objectively say that their behavior was ethically wrong. So why did they do it? Are they bad people? Their actions certainly indicate so.
Well, not always. When you look more closely, a pattern emerges: In general, priests try to avoid unethical behavior. They usually know when they are doing something unethical – and don’t like it very much. Sometimes they just have to do it – it’s expected of them.

Similar to firemen rushing into a burning building, priests sometimes have to do dangerous things. Like bodily harm to a fireman, a priest has to shoulder the risk of destroying his integrity.

For a priest, lying, hate-mongering and spreading homophobia are occupational hazards.

It’s part of their job.

Things that are self-evident

Posted on by

We usually do not talk about things that are self-evident. If something is self-evident, it needs not to be talked about. We, for example, do not begin speeches by pointing out that fire is hot, or that water is wet.

So when you do say that something is self-evident, you are really saying that it is not, in fact, self-evident.

For example, when Jefferson wrote “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal”, it was not, at the time, evident at all. In more ways than just one.

Unfortunately Reverse Phone Lookup , what was self-evident, at that time, was that he forgot about women. Luckily, a mere few hundred years later, the US are trying to correct this.

Today we say that it is self-evident that women and men are equal. We say that because we know they certainly aren’t treated equally. So when we say that they are equal, we merely express our hope that one day it will be so. We purport what is self-evident for it to become so.

No-one writes about things that already are self-evident.

That is self-evident.

Remembering Aisha

Posted on by

Before Malala, there was Aisha.

Sadly, this is not a story of inspiration.

Five years ago today, at age 13, she was murdered. Her crime: being raped.

As reported by the Independent:

A 13-year-old Somali girl, Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow, was buried up to her neck and stoned by 50 men in front of 1,000 people at a stadium in Kismayu in 2008. Her father told Amnesty International she had been raped by three men but was accused of adultery when she tried to report the rape to the [islamist] al-Shabaab militia.

1000 forced spectators. 50 barbaric murderers. 3 rapists. One helpless child.

No merciful God.

“Why I hate Malala”

Posted on by

Kunwar Khuldune Shahid expressed his thoughts pointedly:

“How can I accept Malala to be a hero, when her speeches do not have any Islamic or nationalistic agenda? How can I consider her to be my future leader when nothing she says or does imbues a false sense of superiority in me as a Muslim or a Pakistani? How can I accept that a young girl was able to highlight who our actual enemies are, when grown up men in our parliaments are still hell bent on befriending them? How can I rejoice at Malala’s global achievement when I’ve been taught all my life that a girl’s place is in the kitchen? I just can’t.”

Aptly, succinctly put.

An even better read are the comments. Evidently half the commenters couldn’t find their own humor with both hands and a flashlight.

Open question: will Kunwar be declared an honorary Saudi before they discover sarcasm?

A golden standard

Posted on by

After making headlines around the world for literally discovering new medical territories (developing a medical test to detect homosexuality, and discovering previously unknown dangers that driving a car poses to women), the Saudis are in the spotlight again for yet another discovery: ‘Put up or shut up’ is really hard.

After being offered a seat on the UN security council, the Saudi Foreign Minister turned it down, citing ‘double standards’ and past ‘UN failures’.

It seems the Saudis are disappointed over the fact that the UN did not manage to find a solution to the Palestinian cause nor remove weapons of mass destruction from the Middle East.

It should be noted that, when it comes to double standards, the Saudis are the experts, so we should trust their judgement should they detect one outside their own country.

So, agreed. There are lots of things that can be improved in the UN. This time around, though, the Saudis seem to prefer to take a step back, and focus on other, more pressing things.

Because everyone knows that the best way to change things is to not accept responsibility.

It seems the Saudi Golden Standard – the one that the UN didn’t live up to – currently is ‘Those who can, do; those who can’t, criticize’.

Everyone who’s ever watched a soccer game is familiar with that one.