General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFEMEN Protests: Nobody Asked This Group to Speak For Oppressed Muslim Women
FEMEN Protests: Nobody Asked This Group to Speak For Oppressed Muslim WomenFEMEN is the talk of the world, not because their mission – to end the oppression of women everywhere – is so radical, but because of their titillating methods.
The Ukrainian-based group, which has protested Vladimir Putin, the sex trade, and Muslim states that have terrible feminist track records, protests the oppression of women through removing their clothes. While their methods might raise some eyebrows, far more concerning is their claim to speak for all Muslim women who are being "oppressed," especially without regard for the actual needs of Muslim women or an awareness of how their nudity is equally oppressive.
While FEMEN is determined to fight back against the patriarchy with “bare breasts alone,” not all those they are fighting for are convinced their methods are the right ones. The most egregious example of this has been the emphasis of FEMEN on saving oppressed Muslim women: In an act called “International Topless Jihad Day,” topless protesters in Europe were held outside of mosques in solidarity with a high school Tunisian student who took topless pictures of herself in defiance of religious oppression. However, these protests were not well received by those they were attempting to represent. A group called “Muslim Feminists Against FEMEN” immediately sprung into action on Facebook, posting comments and pictures like: “We understand that it’s really hard for a lot of you white colonial “feminists” to believe, but — SHOCKER! — Muslim women and women of colour can come with their own autonomy, and fight back as well!”
http://www.policymic.com/articles/34105/femen-protests-nobody-asked-this-group-to-speak-for-oppressed-muslim-women
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trajan
(19,089 posts)better ask permission first ...
Yes .. I see it right there in the US Constitution ...
" you have the right to free speech, but you must first get permission from those persons on who's behalf you are protesting"
indeed ...
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)They're saying they shouldn't protest.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)assumption. Don't pretend otherwise.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)I have a bit different take on what constitutes colonialism, and it is not breast baring stuff.
"... the lack of respect or interest in what actual Muslim women have to say when taking up their cause is far from new: it’s just colonialism" is poor hyperbole and lacks recognition of what constitutes colonialism.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Characterizing the motives of others is too then, I suppose.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)And exploiting it to serve their own agenda.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Is an assumption of the identity of those who are actually under such oppressive regimes. They want us to believe that they, FEMEN protesters in safe countries, are subject to the oppression.
It's a diversion from those who should have a voice in this struggle towards those who seem to think the world revolves around their own agenda.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Communists protest for global communism... fine.
Some Americans protest for Palestinian rights...fine
Some Americans protest in favor of Israel's policies... fine
Some Americans protest against bigoted anti-LGBT policies in Uganda and other places... fine
During Apartheid, some Americans protest against racist policies in South Africa... fine
Some women protest against anti-women policies in Asia Minor... BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD COLONIALISM EUROCENTRISM WHARRGARBL!!!!!!
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Western assumption of responsibility for change in countries they have no ties to, especially not having any ties to the oppression they are protesting against. And it's not simply a case of them protesting for the rights of oppressed women to protest. They are assuming the oppression upon themselves with their messages.
They aren't the oppressed. They cannot act as though they are without taking on the role of colonial benevolence. This has to be taken within historical context. Westerners acting as the paternal figure, protecting "lesser" people in Eastern countries and assuming power over their lives.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)This is more crap being thrown against the wall regarding Femen to see what sticks.
A Tunisian woman protested the potential of Sharia law being enacted in Tunisia (and she was protesting the fact that roving gangs from one political faction are currently enforcing defacto Sharia in some neighborhoods).
Femen protested to support her when she was kidnapped by her own family and thrown in a Psych hospital and then various groups started threatening her life.
So the characterizations of colonialism and euro-centrism are, to put it simply, incorrect based on the facts.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)She has been in hiding because of death threats.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Please tell me you dont think you know anything about journalism.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Amina was not kidnapped. She was not put in a psychiatric hospital.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)firsthand.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)I take her at her word being that she is the actual person experiencing these problems.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)She also said this according to the article:
Based on the above it would be fair to assume that she is scared, she was physically assaulted by a member of her family, and she is forced to stay with her family.
It also will be fair not to draw any more conclusions until such time when Amina makes another statement where she will assert that she is no longer in fear for her life, or in danger of being physically assaulted.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)And because I'll probably have a senior moment can you post it again on the DAY you are airing the interview? Or PM me?
Many thanks!
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)going here http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lesersense
or here http://kcaaradio.celestrion.net/kcaa-podcasts/leser/
My show airs at 7pm Eastern time on Sundays on BlogtalkRadio and at 2pm Pacific time on KCAA 1050am radio in inland empire California. And of course, you can always hear them after the fact at the above links.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)steve.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)In Saturday’s interview, Amina told Canal Plus that her family had found her in a café and took her home after the initial pictures were posted online and she appeared on a Tunisian talk show. A cousin broke her cell phone’s SIM card and beat her up, and she was forced to stay with her family, she said. Amina added that she was lucky to have a father who handled the situation well.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)And how hard they are trying to turn Amina into a necessary martyr to further their organizational narrative.
Instead of fighting real oppression, advocating for the rights of Muslim women to self-autonomy, they are exploiting women to further their own warped agenda.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts).... within your family?
You have spent significant amounts of time living under Shari'a? (as a non-Muslim?)
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Femen is set up as a decentralized organization. Any woman or group of women can start up their own local Femen.
That is what Amina, a Tunisian woman living in Tunisia, did. She created Femen Tunisia. That is what some women in Egypt did. Any woman can protest in the name of Femen if they adhere to Femen's principles. Their principles are anti-patriarchy, anti-religion and anti-sex trade.
I interviewed Inna Schevchenko, one of the leaders of Femen two days ago. That interview will be played on my radio show on Sunday and Monday.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)here who seem to try to slut-shame her and reduce her to some kind of attention seeking bimbo.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)for some unspecified nefarious reasons!
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Amazing the lengths people are going to try to discredit them.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)FEMEN does it fair share of protesting against interference of the various religious denominations in state affairs in Russia and Ukraine. Anti-semitism is alive and well in both countries. Too fucking alive and well, for my liking.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)make that accusation. I expect most of those comments are coming from Eastern Europe.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Just Googled FEMEN and Jewish and wish I didn't. Your typical racist accusations of "who is founding FEMEN" based on anti-semitism.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)other things.
What gets the attention?
Amina Tyler.
And an organization started by a Ukranian which has only a handful of members.
Which won't reveal the sources of its funding.
randome
(34,845 posts)
Quantess
(27,630 posts)I hope they do it again and offend even more people.
Me too.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)and also that she was a Muslim woman, but hey, I'm sure she lacks agency because boobs.
It's nice to see that her protest worked so well, though.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)So why do you keep defending Muslim women against FEMEN? Maybe they don't want your 'help'.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)That Muslim should possess the right to self-determination. FEMEN trounces on that right and shifts the discussion away from actual Muslim women to further their own agenda.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Shevchenko, though she might be be earnest in her mission, remains ignorant in her understanding of a Muslim feminist. From her column, it's doubtful that she believes such a thing can exist, even though she states, "I don't deny the fact that there [are] Muslim women who will say they are free and the hijab is their choice and right." She reminds me of an overly-tanned British tourist I overheard in Petra, Jordan last year. Taking a drag of her cigarette, the woman turned and smiled at a young, hijabi waitress and told her, "We're here to start a revolution with you women!" and laughed with her friend as the girl served her.
She sees herself as some benevolent parent figure liberating Muslim women from a life they do not control. It's hogwash.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)on this thread alone.
Yeah. That's it.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)They don't stop to listen to themselves.
You are exactly right, I've argued a lot of points under this OP. And gee, why might someone in media not want to give away an entire segment they have pre-recorded four days before the segment airs. I don't think that's rocket science.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)If not, by your own logic you shouldn't be expressing an opinion.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Unlike FEMEN.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)because you are not a Muslim woman, and only Muslim women (the ones who meet with your approval, I mean, not Muslim women like Amina or Aliaa Elmahdy or Sila Sahin) can make that determination.
Right? I mean, that was the point of your OP, wasn't it?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)They manufactured speculation about her supposed kidnapping or imprisonment. Even though Amina has contradicted those claims.
I do not claim to represent either side anymore than attempting to argue the point that it is necessarily suspicious that a group of outsiders, FEMEN has little or no actual ties to women in Muslim societies, claim to possess authority over Muslim women.
http://jezebel.com/does-femen-believe-muslim-feminists-are-a-thing-471804633
Shevchenko, though she might be be earnest in her mission, remains ignorant in her understanding of a Muslim feminist. From her column, it's doubtful that she believes such a thing can exist, even though she states, "I don't deny the fact that there [are] Muslim women who will say they are free and the hijab is their choice and right." She reminds me of an overly-tanned British tourist I overheard in Petra, Jordan last year. Taking a drag of her cigarette, the woman turned and smiled at a young, hijabi waitress and told her, "We're here to start a revolution with you women!" and laughed with her friend as the girl served her.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)
RainDog
(28,784 posts)This is a beautiful thing to see.
Total evisceration of an argument by three people here.
Just be careful not to use corresponding adjectives, and, whatever you do, don't try to explain tautology, or you'll be known for your "rhetoric."
randome
(34,845 posts)But I will defend your wish to stand up for anyone. I'm not so much for defending your wish to denigrate someone else. Or some other organization.
You have no skin in the game.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)She is protesting the increasingly Islamist pressures in her own Muslim country.
So you believe she belongs to a "deceptive, neo-colonial organization" but clearly she does not. And she's Muslim and this protest is happening in a Muslim country.
So it can't be both.
What about Aliaa Elmahdy in Egypt? Clearly a Muslim woman in a Muslim country. Does she somehow have it wrong too?
And you are the (presumably) non-Muslim from a neo-colonial country telling them they're doing their protests "wrong"?
Uh huh.
Can't have it both ways.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)There is no evidence I'm an illegal immigrant but I participate in immigration rallies so it demonstrates just the opposite right?
Good night.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)literal reading of Quran is ridiculous, outdated, or plain wrong and blasphemous. Kind of like Quakers vs radical X-tians.
Ms. Toad
(34,008 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)of all religions denominations who understand that religion must evolve and adapt to modern times and attitudes, and who can drive that message through to the faithful.
Just to clarify, the Quakers I am thinking of are these ones:
http://www.quaker.org.uk/samesexbriefing
Similar with Liberal Judaism:
http://www.liberaljudaism.org/life-cycle/marriage-civil-partnership.html
and Reform Judaism:
http://news.reformjudaism.org.uk/press-releases/reform-judaism-declares-support-for-marriage-equality.html
PS. I am an atheist.
Ms. Toad
(34,008 posts)As near as I can tell that group is the one I knew as the London Yearly Meeting of Friends. They are likely close to the US group I was assuming you were thinking of: http://www.fgcquaker.org/
I found the interview quite helpful when I ran across it as part of participating in the series of events it was associated with - both in terms of my own personal understanding of Islam and in helping others understand that it is perhaps not quite so rigid as we usually think of it as being.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)defines herself.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Make a correction?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Her definition could be different from yours' doesn't mean it's wrong.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)My assumption is based on two things.
1. There is no evidence she is Muslim.
2. She participates in an expressing anti-Islam organization.
Who has the stronger argument here?
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Participating in anti-Islam protests does not automatically means that one is anti-Islam. Unless of course you provide a definition of Islam. Her definition might disagree with yours. Wouldn't make it wrong, just different from yours. She might sincerely believe in existence of Allah but refuse to accept specific interpretation of Quran. Who are you to tell her she is wrong?
Again, I will point you toward Quakers vs Mormons, etc., Liberal Judaism vs Orthodox Judaism.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Amina could be a very liberal Muslim with different ideas of what it means to be a woman and be Muslim.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)by virtue of being born into Muslim family, assuming of course her family is Muslim.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)What about the Muslim women indifferent to their actions?
The Muslim women that are not aware of their actions?
On edit: We clearly move and interact in different circles .... Muslim women like Christian women, like Jewish women, like Hindu women, like atheist women, like agnostic women are not even close to being a homogeneous group ... their experiences differ vastly as do their opinions .
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Again, because boobs.
Femen's detractors here will fight for each argument until it becomes untenable, then they will change the argument and begin the process again, because boobs.
R B Garr
(16,950 posts)After all, they are the ones with their shirts off.
This topless tactic had to be discussed by FEMEN for it to occur, which makes them about boobs. Discussing their tactics is just that -- discussing their tactics.
Please do post your upcoming interview info that you mentioned in this thread. The one interview I watched of Inna Schevenko (sp?), she was basically saying that FEMEN's purpose was to change the look of feminists from unattractive brainy types apparently to topless hotties. What for? Of course those weren't her exact words, and I found a bit of a accent/language barrier when trying to listen to her, but what I did make out of her mission, it didn't sound like a serious cause.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)FEMEN claimed that Amina's family had put her in a psych ward. Amina says they didn't.
http://www.tunisia-live.net/2013/04/08/topless-femen-activist-says-she-must-leave-tunisia/
In Saturday’s interview, Amina told Canal Plus that her family had found her in a café and took her home after the initial pictures were posted online and she appeared on a Tunisian talk show. A cousin broke her cell phone’s SIM card and beat her up, and she was forced to stay with her family, she said. Amina added that she was lucky to have a father who handled the situation well.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)after asking them what she could do, which is what kicked off the whole issue and 2) I'm sure glad all you folks were telling us she was in no danger at all in her ultra-progressive country, because otherwise I would have worried about her being attacked and beat up and her phone broken, or something. I feel so much better now.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)
zappaman
(20,606 posts)boobs.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)in this thread. I begin to think this is the usual sex = stupidity, patriarchy = agency, war = peace freedom = slavery nonsense. SSDD.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)You won't be able to because you'll never find one. In fact, you will find a few posts where I said that I support Amina.
And yes, I know about Amina's first interactions with FEMEN.
To recap:
The OP said this: FEMEN Protests: Nobody Asked This Group to Speak For Oppressed Muslim Women
You said this: I was under the impression Amina did ask and also that she was a Muslim woman.
Clearly, at the outset, Amina did not ask FEMEN to speak on her behalf. She spoke on her own as a member of FEMEN.
And clearly, Amina did not ask FEMEN to speak on her behalf when they staged the protests (though mostly she supported them) because nobody from FEMEN was in contact with her.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)by the fact that nearly every post you've made in "support" has been railing against her methods. So what exactly were you supporting again?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Nor have I railed against FEMEN's methods (and I have been keeping up with them for over two years and actually "liked" them on Facebook). I criticized this particular protest.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)We can take this as total support for the methods?
RE: If women have to get their tits out to make a point, so be it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2583041
I think it is ridiculous that WESTERN women have to get their tits out to make a point... that they have to show their tits to be taken seriously.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)No wonder we have a problem of communicating.
FYI, since I deleted the OP, my point was that I objected to the title of the your second link (but I was a bit "in my cups" and in the morning and felt I hadn't expressed my point well - so I self deleted):
"If women have to get their tits out to make a point, so be it."
My response was: "I think it is ridiculous that WESTERN women have to get their tits out to make a point... that they have to show their tits to be taken seriously."
I was criticizing those liberal men who only seem to take feminists seriously when they bare their breasts. I was referring to the notion that women "have to get their tits out" not the actual baring of such. That for some western liberal men, after all that women have accomplished to date believe it is tits that advance feminism rather than our words and actions.
It is like this:
What Amina did was brave and extra-ordinarily given the confines the country she lives in.
Western feminist women, after decades of intellectual thought, communication, and activism... of working alongside men and proving that they are strong, intelligent, pragmatic, and capable... at this point in time, shouldn't have to bare their breasts to be taken seriously.
For what it is worth, I love activism theater and I have been arrested for such.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)There's no shortage of those in this thread. The whole boob issue seems to have trip trapped over some people's bridges.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)But it's a damn good thing they decided to speak up, IMO.
Many women in Islamist countries have no more right and ability to speak out and fight back then slaves in the Americas did.
Sure. there's always going to be a few "Slaves Against Freedom" "Women Against Equality" or "Chickens For Colonel Sanders", but that is what happens when people spend their entire existences in captivity with institutionalized inferior status, oppression, and abuse as their norm. Women abused in domestic relationships all too commonly deny the abuse and protect their abuser. Freedom threatens the perceived security of their oppression and captivity.
The serious opposition to [woman suffrage] has been financed by the Whiskey Interests and the Cotton Mill owners of New England and the South. The former feared the suppression of the whiskey traffic and the latter the suppression of the exploitation of child labor, and of the competition of insufficiently paid labor of women in their mills. –Chief Justice Walter Clark to Henry Watterson, 1919.i
While the cause helped unify diverse groups with different agendas in the United States (US), as in Britain and Canada, suffrage roused great controversy and opposition. Peaking at a time of considerable ferment in the meanings and configurations of race, gender, and class in the US, advocates themselves split over white supremacy, the role of the state, and property ownership. The American South proved a special battlefield. Even as they demanded an end to discrimination against women, some leading suffragists promoted suffrage as a means of preserving white supremacy and systematic discrimination against people of color (Wheeler 1993). Such prejudices linked them, ironically enough, to their opponents. Southern antis, supported by saloon protective leagues and many industrialists, likewise positioned themselves as the champions of White Rule. For them, however, suffragists associated with equal rights campaigns threatened that dominance.
Mauritania’s endless sea of sand dunes hides an open secret: An estimated 10% to 20% of the population lives in slavery. But as one woman’s journey shows, the first step toward freedom is realizing you’re enslaved.
Once this seed — a question that would undo his entire world — had been planted in his mind, he couldn’t stop it from growing. By 16, he returned to his family’s nomadic settlement in the desert to tell his slaves that they were free. He was shocked by their response.
They did not want to be free, he recalled. Or they didn’t know what freedom was.
His mother told him to stop being silly — that the slaves needed the family to take care of them and that this was the natural order of the world, the way it always would be.
Since 2002, LAF has refuted the follies of feminism and promoted a strong, intelligent, biblical view of womanhood. We love femininity and are delighted to share the beauties of the womanly virtues with women all over the world.
I'm very well aware of the fact that WAFs were women of the Women's Air Force in World War II, but for this site I thought I'd give it a different meaning - Women Against Feminism.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)labeled some sort of regionalist? As my friend the Rude Pundit would say !@#$ that.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)If you haven't read this novel, I highly recommend it; it illustrates how women do not have agency under strict authoritarian patriarchal religion based societies/cultures. It's a great read, you may find it a bit frightening.
They were quickly able to take away all of the women's rights, largely attributed to the financial records being stored electronically and labelled by gender. The new theocratic military dictatorship-styled "The Republic of Gilead", moved quickly to consolidate its power and reorganize society along a new militarized, hierarchical, compulsorily cult-Christian regime of selectively skewed Old Testament-inspired social and religious ultra-conservatism among its newly created social classes. In this society, almost all women are forbidden to read.
The story is presented from the point of view of a woman called Offred (literally Of-Fred, however not a patronymic as some critics claim). The character is one of a class of individuals kept as concubines ("handmaids"
for reproductive purposes by the ruling class in an era of declining births. The book is told in the first person by Offred, who describes her life during her third assignment as a handmaid, in this case to Fred (referred to as "The Commander" . Interspersed in flashbacks are portions of her life from before and during the beginning of the revolution, when she finds she has lost all autonomy to her husband, through her failed attempt to escape with her husband and daughter to Canada, to her indoctrination into life as a handmaid. Through her eyes, the structure of Gilead's society is described, including the several different categories of women and their circumscribed lives in the new theocracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid%27s_Tale
When there is no real possibility for oppressed persons to achieve any real degree of self-determination within a controlled authoritarian environment, and when they are held hostage at all times within that environment, agency is little more than the projected will of the captor.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)FYI, I have a copy of Handmaid's Tale in my bag as we speak.
Unlike many here, I will not attempt to falsely equate the absolute authoritative subjection of women in the novel with women in Muslim nations. They are dissimilar enough that the comparison is actually offensive, again, to the agency of Muslim women.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)pressuring Islamist Religion States in order to get them to allow women the most basic human rights and freedoms.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)FEMEN is anti-Islam. Which alone is not something I object to. However, what I do object to is an anti-Islamic group attempting to speak for Muslim women.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Or an anti-slavery group in say the UK protesting for abolition of slavery in the US?
Really? That's what you mean to say? That somehow Islam is a protected religion and protesting against it is a problem?
Even Jimmy Carter has renounced the SBC. Is his protest of the SBC and their treatment of women anti-Christian, and even if it was is that really a problem?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)You can't protest to try to have people treat others with respect and dignity unless you are the same nationality/ethnicity/culture.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)Religion States to allow more rights and freedoms for women? Or do you consider that a violation of the agency of Muslim Women as well?
Women’s and Girls’ Rights
http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/world-report-2012-saudi-arabia
The Saudi guardianship system continues to treat women as minors. Under this discriminatory system, girls and women of all ages are forbidden from traveling, studying, or working without permission from their male guardians. In 2009 the Ministry of Commerce, though not other ministries, stopped requiring women to conduct ministerial business through a male representative.
On September 25 King Abdullah announced that women will be able to vote in municipal elections in 2015. The government continued to exclude women as voters or candidates in the September 2011 municipal elections, despite a two-year delay to allow for logistical preparations to include women. In March 2011 women activists launched the Baladi (My Country) campaign in protest, trying—unsuccessfully—to register to vote. In the first municipal elections in 2005, authorities said that election workers could not verify a woman’s identity since many did not have identity cards. However, the Interior Ministry began issuing identity cards to women over 22 years old in 2000. The king also promised to appoint women as full members of the Shura Council.
On May 22, Saudi authorities arrested Manal al-Sharif after she defied the kingdom’s de facto ban on women driving. Al-Sharif appeared in a video showing herself behind the wheel. Prosecutors charged her with “tarnishing the kingdom’s reputation abroad” and “stirring up public opinion,” according to Saudi press reports. On May 30, Khobar police released al-Sharif from prison after she appealed to King Abdullah.
On June 17 around 40 women with international drivers’ licenses participated in a “women2drive” campaign. No law bars women from driving, but senior government clerics have ruled against the practice. Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world t
Zorra
(27,670 posts)It is most certainly an instructional work.
Social Critique
The Handmaid's Tale comprises a number of social critiques. Atwood sought to demonstrate that extremist views might result in fundamentalist totalitarianism. The novel presents a dystopian vision of life in the United States in the period projecting forward from the time of the writing (1985), covering the backlash against feminism. This critique is most clearly seen in both Offred's memories of theslow social transformation towards theocratic fascism and in the ideology of the Aunts. Atwood's motivations for writing the novel, reflecting the above statements, can be found in the interview appended to the 1998 version of the novel. She says, "This is a book about what happens when certain casually held attitudes about women are taken to their logical conclusions" (394).
Atwood mocks those who talk of "traditional values" and those who suggest that women should return to being housewives. For Serena Joy, a formerly successful TV personality and public speaker, the religious and social ideology she has spent her entire long career publicly promoting has, in the end, destroyed her own life and happiness.
Atwood also offers a critique of contemporary feminism. By working against pornography, feminists in the early 1980s opened themselves up to criticism that they favoured censorship. Anti-pornography feminist activists such as Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon made alliances with the religious right. Atwood warns that the consequences of such an alliance may end up empowering feminists' worst enemies. She also suggests, through descriptions of the narrator's feminist mother burning books, that contemporary feminism was becoming overly rigid and adopting the same tactics of the religious right.
Most notably, Atwood critiques modern religious movements, specifically fundamentalist Christianity in the United States, with a reference to Islamic fundamentalism such as the theocracy founded in Iran in 1979. An American religious revival in the mid-1970s had led to the growth of the religious right through televangelism. Jimmy Carter, then president, had avowed his renewed and reaffirmed Christianity; Ronald Reagan was elected as his successor using a specifically Christian discourse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid%27s_Tale#Social_critique
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Because you appear to be telling THEM what to do which is.... disassociating Muslim women from their own agency...
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)There is a difference between protesting in solidarity and claiming oppression that you've never been subjected to as your own.
The latter is exactly what outside FEMEN members are doing.
What does it say about an organization when a bunch of white, non-Muslim women disparage Islam in a secular nation? It demonstrates the paternal, neo-colonial tendencies to which they not so discretely subscribe.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)"In an act called “International Topless Jihad Day,” topless protesters in Europe were held outside of mosques in solidarity with a high school Tunisian student who took topless pictures of herself in defiance of religious oppression."
You are making up the rules for how and why women are supposed to protest now and if THAT isn't disempowering I don't know what is...
What the hell are "outside" FEMEN members by the way? That also makes no sense. You do know that protests often involve people who aren't members of a specific oppressed group who protest as well correct?
I'm a white woman who protests at immigration rallies in solidarity with the Hispanic community. Am I NOT allowed to do that?
WTF?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)That's not a solidarity protest. That's just a demonstration of their ignorance and anti-Islam beliefs.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)And you think you are the one whose all about empowerment?
And of course you didn't answer my point at all - that these women were protesting in solidarity with Amina. Which according to you IS an acceptable protest since you know, you've set yourself up as the arbiter of what women can do in their protests and all that.
At least they had that going for them eh? Phew! You must be glad they read Gravitycollapse's Guide to Ladylike Protests!
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)I'm saying they are stupid and really islamaphobic to protest outside of Mosques that have absolutely nothing to do with the issues associated with Amina.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Do you even know what Amina was protesting? Its been mentioned several times already.
A hint: its about the patriarchal Islamic oppression, especially towards women, that's creeping over Tunisia. Especially as the vote on their new constitution has been derailed by Salafi Gulf state meddling.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Even though it is being perpetrated by a right-wing extremist minority.
That doesn't make ANY sense. And that is why protesting outside of Mosques that are not responsible for the problems associated with Amina is absurd. It's not just absurd, it's Islamaphobia.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Whether its the civil rights movement protests, or immigration protests, or anti-Israel protests, or anti-apartheid protests.
Just because it makes you uncomfortable - and others - doesn't mean you get to tell them what they can do.
I fervently HATE Fred Phelps and his gang. But they have the right to go wherever they want and protest. I fully, 110% support that right. That doesn't mean I have to like it, or that I have to make it easy for them. As numerous effective counter protests have demonstrated the Phelps clan can and are often swamped by those who block them.
But as for their right to be wherever they want?
Yup. Certainly.
We RAILED against the pens for the anti-war protests. They were typically miles away from anything which meant the powers that be NEVER saw the ugly side of things. Or they were shunted off into side streets for marches. Now you appear to be saying "good! exactly right! put those uppity protesters far, far away so nobody is ever made to feel uncomfortable or examine the issue"!
Is that REALLY what you mean to say?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Really?
So those of us who have protested against the Israeli actions in Gaza have no right to do that or we are "disassociating Palestinians from their agency"?
Or those of us who protested against apartheid, we "disassociated South Africans from their agency"?
I've just come from an immigration rights rally. I'm not Hispanic not an illegal immigrant but I care about what's happening to their communities. So my protest was actually "disassociated Hispanics from their agency"?
You do realize how ridiculous your position is right?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Instead of assuming the role of moralist for Palestinians.
FEMEN is not interested in the autonomy of Muslim women. They in fact that Muslim women are not capable of self-determination.
http://jezebel.com/does-femen-believe-muslim-feminists-are-a-thing-471804633
Shevchenko, though she might be be earnest in her mission, remains ignorant in her understanding of a Muslim feminist. From her column, it's doubtful that she believes such a thing can exist, even though she states, "I don't deny the fact that there [are] Muslim women who will say they are free and the hijab is their choice and right." She reminds me of an overly-tanned British tourist I overheard in Petra, Jordan last year. Taking a drag of her cigarette, the woman turned and smiled at a young, hijabi waitress and told her, "We're here to start a revolution with you women!" and laughed with her friend as the girl served her.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Obviously the rest are not since they don't fit into your own self-created paradigm about what's okay.
And you believe you aren't telling (this woman) protesters what they can and can't do.
Sorry but that's bullshit.
Nice women rarely make history. And sometimes it takes protests that may make you feel uncomfortable to get the message out. Clearly Amina (and Aliaa etc) make you uncomfortable. Clearly not-nice women protesters like myself who protest outside of YOUR permission zone make you uncomfortable.
Good luck with that.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)There is a difference between a solidarity protest expressing support for a groups autonomy and a protest attempting to shoulder and exploit oppression that they do not suffer under.
polly7
(20,582 posts)– Various sectarian groups have thus taken it upon themselves to enforce the wearing of hijab in a violent way, taking away women’s choice.
– Many Iraqi women, due to their fear of being raped and harassed, are having to wear not only a veil but also complete black dress in order not to attract attention.
– In 2004, leaflets were distributed regarding conservative dress requirements for women; they were told they must wear hijab.
http://civics.sites.unc.edu/files/2012/05/WomeninIraqPPT.pdf
Iraqi Women Face Greater Danger, Fewer Rights
by ANNE GARRELS
January 29, 2008 4:00 PM
Listen to the Story
Their right to go where and do what they wish has been dramatically restricted by the rise of Islamist parties and extremist groups.
Women's rights groups report that in the past six months, more than 100 women have been killed in the city of Basra for wearing make-up or what is deemed Western clothing. Those who dare to defend them have also been attacked and, in some cases, killed.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18518858
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)The Iraqi women's situation is still relevant though. FEMEN is speaking for them, as well as all Muslim women everywhere who are oppressed. I don't have cancer, but I run, bike and walk for the cause every year.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)They're women. I'm not sure what the confusion here is.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)which also considers women second class citizens. Edited to add that even Jimmy Carter agrees with me on this. Is he some kind of anti-religion nut?
Is this wrong?
So I'm for "liberating" women from the SBC. Horrific isn't it?
Actually I'd like to see ALL women liberated from patriarchal religions but I'm an atheist so that is part of it.
Personally, I don't have a problem with that goal.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)that anytime I protest in solidarity with Hispanics over unjust immigration policies I'm simply "shouldering and exploiting" oppression I do not suffer under.
Which is neo-colonial exploitation and oppressive to their "agency" and does NOT fall within the parameters you feel you must enforce upon us uppity women. And since we went to a place to protest you believe may have been rude and intrusive, in order to make a point, that we also "weren't doing it right", cuz ya know, its just rude to go to a place where one might have maximum impact when making a protest cuz it might hurt people's feelings.
Do I have it correctly yet? Exactly what you think I must do, and what I'm doing wrong?
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)to defend positions when they are pinned to a corner.
Sickening.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)A bit trolly, eh?
RainDog
(28,784 posts)So, they can IMMEDIATELY mobilize to fight another feminist group - which gets them attention.
Which is the point.
They should be thanking FEMEN.
If those who are so disturbed by the perceived "imperialism" were true to feminist principles - they would remember it's a WORLDWIDE HUMAN RIGHTS issue. If that's imperialism - then your definition of a cultural heritage includes oppression of women.
This reminds me of old arguments about opposition to female circumcision as a form of imperialism - because that was the claim some feminists made too.
It's funny tho - here on DU, the problem seems to be that some are bothered by the reality that the female body gets the attention of het males. This is stupid beyond stupid - to make an issue of this. Yes, het males like to look at females. Het females like to look at males. Homo guys like to look at guys. Homo females like to look at females.
If you think that's horrible - you don't like humankind.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)RainDog
(28,784 posts)if that bothers you - you're ridiculous.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Indeed.
RainDog
(28,784 posts)You make my case.
polly7
(20,582 posts)They'll get over it.
randome
(34,845 posts)...find themselves on opposite sides of an issue!
Thank you!
Prism
(5,815 posts)The HRC, GLAAD, the Taskforce.
They're always doing stupid shit in the name of the LGBT community. Am I consulted? No. Do straight people scramble to let everyone know these groups did not consult Prism before doing stupid shit? No.
But they're for LGBT and human rights, so hooray and all that.
Never has so much titty tut-tutting amounted to so little of consequence.
MadrasT
(7,237 posts)The OP isn't ridiculous, but this thread sure went off the deep end.
It is not fucking complicated.
a) FEMEN gets to protest with their breasts if they want.
b) Other people get to speak up and say they think it's bullshit if they want.
And neither "side" needs to shut up or stop doing what they're doing.
I think what FEMEN is doing is ridiculous bullshit, but I also support their right to engage in whatever activities they want.
The Op is just plain fucking weird.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)One doesn't need to read any further than first paragraph quoted in OP.
Oh well, keep trying.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)
idwiyo
(5,113 posts) kwassa
(23,340 posts)Written on her back is "Fuck Vladimir Putin".
I guess he was looking at her front.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Let's see how intellectually honest you are. Interpret those two things for me.
#1 - Thinks their protest was enjoyable and non-threatening
#2 - Instructs his government to request the harshest punishment for them.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Putin has instructed his government to request the harshest possible punishment for them?
This happened in Germany, by the way.
where this was the condition of their arrests:
Following their arrest in Hanover, Shevchenko and her four colleagues spent five hours in police custody. "It was very amicable," she says. "Not like being arrested in Ukraine. We drank tea and coffee with the police and talked about lots of issues." After her release the first thing she did was to call her dad, a Ukrainian military official. "It was his birthday. I said: 'Happy birthday, Dad – I've just attacked Putin.' He said: 'Uh ah. I'd better tell Mum.'"
Shevchenko now live in Germany, by the way.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/12/femen-activist-protest-putin-merkel
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Kremlin urges Germany to punish topless protest against Putin
Russia has urged Germany to punish a group of women who staged a bare-breasted protest against President Vladimir Putin today during a visit to a trade fair in Hanover with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Three members of the women's rights group Femen, which has staged protests against Russia's detention of the feminist punk band Pussy Riot around Europe, disrupted a visit by Putin and Merkel to an industry fair focusing on Russian business.
They stripped off to the waist and shouted slogans calling the Russian leader a "dictator" before being covered up and bundled away by security men.
"This is ordinary hooliganism and unfortunately it happens all over the world, in any city. One needs to punish (them)," said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)An investigation has only just been launched on charges of publically insulting government officials and representatives of foreign states, which is punishable by three years in prison, or five in cases of slander.
However, the Hanover police said the young women are likely to get off with a small fine. According to Kommersant, the protest was staged by five women, aged from 19 to 33, three of them German citizens and two Ukrainians. The five activists have been released, but only the Ukrainian citizens were released on bail.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)strong punishments.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Femen is trivial, everyone knows it.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)about the message written on her chest?
What does his reaction have to do with usefulness of her protest?
Can you present some evidence that would confirm his reaction to the message written on her chest or on her back would be different if she was protesting in a different way?
I say that he would simply ignore it, regardless of how it's presented. People like Putin don't give a shit about protesters until such moment when they are forced to act because they cant't ignore it anymore.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Putin isn't forced to act by this woman, or anything this woman has the power to do.
Femen is hardly a mass movement. It exists mostly as a media phenomena, and when the media gets bored, Femen will no longer get covered, and it will disappear.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)They had enough coverage to get their message across.
BTW, was there anyone else protesting who managed to accomplish more?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)goalposts, she then tore them down and threw them away.
I'm talking about the thread that starts with msg #120 and ending with my #214
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)
kwassa
(23,340 posts)You never fail to amuse.
I am a he, by the way.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)kwassa
(23,340 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Throw as much shit as possible and hope something sticks?
Did they piss in your Cheerios, or are you just jealous because they are getting all the attention? Or is it something to do with them not afraid to be naked in public?
kwassa
(23,340 posts)We tell you why we object to the Femen protests, and you and stevenlesser ignore what we say and insist that we are motivated by anti-nude sentiments.
This is because you can't defend, with any reason, why Femen protesters use sexuality to protest ideas that have nothing to do with sexuality. Attracting attention isn't enough.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)I can easily defend FEMEN, and its really very very simple: Their bodies, Their choice.
It is absolutely irrelevant if I like or dislike their way of protesting. They have every single right to protest in any way they want.
It is absolutely irrelevant what I do or don't think about nudity. I am pro-choice and as such I support their decision to use their naked bodies to present their messages.
Once again, what is your beef with FEMEN?
kwassa
(23,340 posts)They of course have the right to protest any way they choose, that is their freedom of speech.
I also have the right to criticize their method, exercising my freedom of speech.
I think that their method does damage to women's rights advocates everywhere, as they protest the sexual objectification of women by becoming sex objects themselves, which doesn't make any sense, and creates dissonance. They contradict their own purpose with their behavior.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Last edited Sat Apr 13, 2013, 07:56 AM - Edit history (1)
right's advocates everywhere, as they protest the sexual objectification of women by becoming sex objects themselves"
It doesn't apply to me, and doesn't apply to other supporters. It doesn't apply to those who don't have a problem with nudity.
Personally I don't need a lecture on women rights to understand why a woman would protest with a slogan "Fuck your morals" written on her naked body. It's self evident, just like "Fuck off, Putin" or "Ukraine is not a whorehouse". Nakedness just amplifies the message, in part because it points out the hypocrisy of those people who associate someone being naked with an invitation to have sex with them or to treat them as sexual objects.
Ironic, isn't it when hypocrites are those same people who loudly profess to be defenders of "equal rights for women everywhere".
Added: Even more ironic that you claim you don't have a problem with nudity but make statements like the one I quoted above.
Here it is again:
Sorry to tell you, but they "become sex objects" only in eyes of those who equate nudity with invitation to have sex.
BTW, video below is a proof positive that PTB takes FEMEN seriously.
This is Mr Lukashenko, president of Belorussia giving a lecture on how to deal with FEMEN, and he is not happy that others do not understand how important it is to deal with them quietly, firmly, and definitely without attracting public attention.
You will need someone to translate the video for you if you don't understand Russian.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)
It doesn't apply to me, and doesn't apply to other supporters. It doesn't apply to those who don't have a problem with nudity.
No, I have no problem with nudity at all, and most who disagree with you here on DU have no problem with nudity, either. You keep insisting on this, and you are wrong on this. It is the CONTEXT of the nudity, a point you haven't addressed at all. Nudity can and does mean different things in different contexts. Nudity in the context of public protest is counterproductive unless it is related to the subject of the protest.
Personally I don't need a lecture on women rights to understand why a woman would protest with a slogan "Fuck your morals" written on her naked body. It's self evident, just like "Fuck off, Putin" or "Ukraine is not a whorehouse".
I don't understand why a woman would protest with "Fuck your morals" written in English on her body in the first place. This seems to be the Femen slogan, but it doesn't make much sense. Everyone has morals of some kind; is this a statement that morality is wrong, or the idea of moral behavior is wrong? This is one of the contradictions in their stand, as they are claiming to take a moral stance themselves. It is hardly a discussion of moral systems, one way or another. It is not self-evident, nor are the other slogans. Why not just use a large sign to express your point of view?
Nakedness just amplifies the message, in part because it points out the hypocrisy of those people who associate someone being naked with an invitation to have sex with them or to treat them as sexual objects.
There is no evident hypocrisy here. This association is the current societal norm, not the exception. Please point out what is hypocritical about it. Nakedness distracts the message, and does not amplify it. It destroys the message, in fact.
This group includes almost the entire world. This makes Femen's tactics utterly unsuited to their stated purpose. If they wish to persuade an audience to join them in their causes, they need to find an effective communications strategy that reaches their audience. Nudity won't do it.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Amina Tyler is Tunisian. She was addressing cultural issues in her own country. What could possibly be more patronizing, misogynist and anti-feminist than this tottering, tortured argument there are too many white women involved in the organization?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)is an actuality. And it must be dealt with.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Just so we're clear, what again is the basis for sneering at a Tunisian woman's protest against issues in her own culture?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)Because it sure looks like that is the core of the issue for you.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)It's pretty obvious.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)This thread is a farce. I have read the whole thread, and I am seeing nothing more weighty than disruption on your part. your positions are untenable, and you have nearly null credibility. Pure disruption.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Clearly, explicitly you are. They are also FEMEN.
You can claim to be about "outside" FEMEN members but that doesn't wash. You can't simply ignore the Muslim members as though they don't count. That's REALLY dissing their power.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)The group seems to expressly hate Islam.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)But that we know of at least TWO prominent members at least. But you've already been reminded of that at least oh, numerous times on this thread alone.
And so what if they hate Islam. I hate the Catholic church and christianity because of their corruption and pedophilia and their treatment of women and the GLBT community. What is so wrong with that?
Sometimes a religion and a church (or mosque) needs some hating. I hate Fred Phelps and his version of christianity. Jimmy Carter is hating on the SBC right now. That's actually okay if you ask me. So FEMEN hates Islam. Why does Islam get some kind of special pass?
If they are Islamophobic for being against the way women are treated in that religion then Jimmy Carter is christianity-phobic for being against the way women are treated in his religion.
I'm perfectly okay with that. Clearly you are not.
But that someone has the right to protest those things should be indisputable.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 11, 2013, 11:28 PM - Edit history (1)
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)she's still a Muslim- maybe nominally like Salman Rushdie but for purposes of discussion she's clearly considered to be part of the fold.
Aliaa is trickier - she may still be Muslim or an atheist but has Muslim parents and is obviously protesting against the Islamist religious forces at work in Egypt.
And honestly, I don't think it matters - these are women operating in their own cultural Muslim context and within their own Muslim countries. You deny their own "voice" and empowerment?!
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Edited to add that Amina's protests are occurring within her own cultural context (Muslim) and within her own country. You are denying her "agency" to work within her own sphere and somehow trying to shame her protest.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Her participation in an organization that expressly denies the legitimacy of religion, and specifically Islam, lends itself to the argument that she is not a Muslim.
Aliia is a self-proclaimed secularist. This photo kind of demonstrates that:
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)
octothorpe
(962 posts)laws that Christian law makers try to pass? Let's say anti-abortion laws for example.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts) 
Deep13
(39,154 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 11, 2013, 11:41 PM - Edit history (1)
Okay, FEMEN does not speak for most Muslim women. Got it.
So why is their protest such a big deal? A few women decided to send a message by getting undressed. So what? Why such an indignant back lash? Is this really worse than the patriarchal and often oppressive system that writers like this are trying to protect?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)One born from the other.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)So they are oppressing themselves??!!
Your position is crazy.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)and neither do you.
We only know of Amina and Aliaa.
Who you appear to want to somehow slam for their own protests as part of FEMEN. You want to rail against neo-colonialism but want to somehow impose restrictions on how women should or should not protest.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 11, 2013, 11:27 PM - Edit history (1)
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Simple membership with an organization doesn't indicate one is one thing or another.
I belong to several organizations dedicated to passing fair immigration reform. But I'm not an illegal immigrant.
Membership does not equal anything but membership so Aliaa and Amina's membership with FEMEN does not indicate anything about their religious beliefs.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)to assume that its participants are also anti-religious.
Kind of like how it's safe to assume members of ALF are probably not meat eaters.
octothorpe
(962 posts)They live in countries in which the Islamic religion greatly influences the culture that they are protesting about. Are only muslims allowed to protest islamic laws/rules/customs that applied to everyone who lives in the region?
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Muslim on women, without even asking them who or what THEY think they are.
Privilege, privilege...
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)By definition, the protesters are not in charge. They aren't forcing clothing on or off of anyone.
Secondly, they may well be speaking for themselves. Controlling women's bodies may be institutionalized in Islam, but that's hardly the only place body shaming and sexual control is exerted.
And, they are of course right. They do own their bodies and can do what they like with them.
What's really specious about your argument is that you avoid all of the substance in order to arrive at a place where women protesting oppression of women is somehow not only wrong, but some kind of crime in itself.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Man, Judith Butler would have some choice words for you.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)You're not in charge of who gets to protest what, period. THAT is patronizing and an attempt to if not oppress, to control.
You especially don't get to tell people they're not the right color or religion or nationality to speak out, nor turn a point of view which is absolutely valid and correct into an evil on the basis you don't approve of who's saying it.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)There are a lot of cultural enclaves in NYC. People from other parts of the world live in communities that closely resemble their home culture. Can I not speak out if women are being oppressed in one of these communities? It's only OK to speak out for white women from the US?
But wait, I'm not exactly white either, I'm multicultural and multiracial. So who can I speak out for again?
Oh boy, I've just thought of a descriptive phrase for what the OP advocates:
Ethical Segregation
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)stoning and beheadings many years before Amina took action. FEMEN might have consulted with them (though they believe that a woman cannot be both a Muslim and a feminist --- kinda similar to the belief of some DUers that a person cannot be both a Catholic and a Democrat) before taking action that they believe may put Amina and other feminists in more danger.
FEMEN is anti-porn and anti-prostitution so they actually do not believe that women own their own bodies and can do what they like with them.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)But for some people it translates into anti-choice. Not sure how or why but that's what some people believe. You seems to be one of them.
I am anti-porn industry where such industry is based on anything but free and informed consent.
I am most definitely pro-legalised and safe prostitution, and porn produced by consenting adults.
My definition of "consenting" includes "not forced to consent because this is the only option available for this particular person to make a living, or because they think they have no other options".
Unfortunately for lots of women other options are either not available or what is available is worse then participating in prostitution or porn industry. Also some women might not be even aware they have other options or have a mistaken belief other options are not available for them.
Deep13
(39,154 posts)The whole point of the FEMEN protest was to deconstruct the idea that masculine honor comes from feminine modesty. That idea is a social control that gives men the right to control "their" women to protect the men's honor. By taking her clothes off, that woman in Tunis instantly deprived men of their honor while demonstrating what an idiotic idea it really is. European supporters emulated her in support. Frankly, it was a brave thing to do, not only because they knew they were doing something embarrassing and socially unacceptable, but because they now risk murders themselves from Muslim extremists. (It's happened before.)
So now Muslim women, many of whom live under the thumb of patriarchal expression are dutifully coming out in defense of that system. It reminds me of an abused wife who insists her drunk of a husband still loves her. It's a little ironic since we would never have heard from most of these anti-FEMEN protesters if they did not have outsiders to criticize.
It doesn't matter that the FEMEN group lives in the West. There is no monolithic "West" anymore than there is one Orient. Ending Orientalism not only helps free Muslims from Western condescension, but it allows Westerners to understand that Middle Eastern people are the same as they are. Consequently, there is no reason why people who are in a position to challenge the Muslim patriarchy outside of majority-Muslim countries should not do so.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)seriously
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Response to Gravitycollapse (Original post)
Post removed
Deep13
(39,154 posts)Colonial feminist is a contradiction in terms.
True, imperialists have used feminism to cast Muslims into a Saidian other. 100 years ago Lord Cromer was pushing for liberalization of gender roles in Egypt in an effort to replace local patriarchy with foreign patriarchy. Meanwhile, he actively opposed women's suffrage in England.
I really doubt this protest group had that in mind.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Every culture has its Phyllis Schlaflys.
Apologists who say "I think it's great that we're second-class citizens!" "I like being sent off in the corner!" "I like being told I can't hold leadership positions!" "I like being made to wear a sack over my head and view the world through a little slit!"
Like I said, Islam deserves to be insulted. Today's Islam has become a cruel, misogynistic, authoritarian regime. FEMEN's well within their rights to protest them in whatever way they like.
Don't think I just pick on Islam. Islam's not even close to being unique in its cruelty, misogyny and authoritarianism. Look at Orthodox Judaism - sex-segregation, women not allowed to be in the leadership, women told how they're allowed to dress and act. Roman Catholicism. Again, women not allowed to be in the leadership, and they'd like to be able to tell women how to dress, but thankfully, here in the West, we've managed to keep the clergy's kiddy-fiddling mitts off the levers of power for the most part, otherwise they'd have every woman under their power dressing like nuns. Don't think for one second they don't want to. Go to the Bible Belt in the U.S. - they do tell women how to dress, forbid them from showing any sort of leadership at all, and make them sex-segregate in society.
Religion is the single biggest source of misogyny in the world, by orders of magnitude. No other institution comes close.
Religion poisons everything!
