"Feminists' next big foe: repressive Islamic fundamentalists"

[laura888]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60958-2004Feb21.html

<snip>
"Many feminists are out of touch with the realities of the war that has been declared against the secular, Judeo-Christian, modern West. They are still romanticizing and cheering for Third World anti-colonialist movements, without a realistic view of what will happen to the global status of women if the Islamists win."
</snip>


I can't believe that the Post printed this crap!

I'm sick of Neo-conservatives pointing to female repression in Islamic states to justify American aggression against these countries. To their way of thinking, female repression is another form of WMDs – a way to whip up American frensy so as to justify invading and occupying Arab countries.

[wellstone_democrat]

1. Nonsense, who protested a return to Shar'ia?

I love the monolithic "feminist" opinions articles like this use. Find any woman who says what you want to hear for your headline and presto: Feminists are doing this bad thing....

Even "NOW" is hardly representative of all "Feminists" but I'm still trying to think of one woman I know who has any Feminist leanings whatsoever who has NOT warned of the dangers of a theocracy based on political Islam. Burquas, Shar'ia law in Iraq, the whole issue has been one of protesting this trend.

Let's trot out "The Comforter in Chief" (Pickles Bush) as "caring" about Middle Eastern women shall we? Where is she and the other so-called "non-Feminist" women now? Where is the Bush* admins caring for the status of women in their new "empire of liberty" when they think a return to Shar'ia Law in Iraq is good for women?

Its NOT the "Feminists" its the Imperialists who are aiding this.

[RainDog]

2. The Republicans were in bed with the Taliban

..and they dare to lecture anyone about feminism???

Since when is "Judeo-Christian" synonymous with feminist?

I don't see those promise keeper cultists in anyway supportive of enlightenment principles.

I don't see how any man who claims that god speaks to him and has told him to attack another country is democratic, even though he stole the presidency.

The right wing "judeo christian" camp has more in common with right wing islam than EITHER of them have to do with democracy or feminism.

To me, any religion which posits that women should be subject to men, or that women are in any way inferior to men, is a worthless religion.

[seabeyond]

3. as they in their fundamentalism

have women stand behind the man, lol

have you heard how a white conservative male talks of female, oh ya, that is respect, not

[newyawker99]

12. Hi seabeyond!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Mari333]

4. The southern Baptists and the Taliban have more in common

then they admit.

[PsychoDad]

5. This "repression"

Must be the reason so many western women are embracing Islam. "They", the noe-cons and their bed mates the religious* right, should look at what is happening in their own backyard, and notice that Islam, the second largest religion in the west is also the fastest growing.

They may start to ask why... and look to themselves.


* I will not call these people "christian". They do not follow the teachings of Jesus. I will not allow them to steal the name of the christ and degregate all real christians and the prophet Jesus(as).

[usrbs]

6. Sanity check - fundamental Islam is worse for women than Judaism or Christ

And I know how anti-feminist both those religions can be, but there's just no comparison. Afghanistan and Saudia are proof of that. Before accusing me of racism, search for stories about Christian honor killings, Jewish women not being allowed to work or just leave their houses without males, and Jewish or Christian women forced to wear burkas or be beaten in the streets by religious thugs. (Yes, I know about the wigs ultra-orthodox women wear).

[PsychoDad]

7. Afghanistan and Saudi extremes

Are products of culture, not religion. Cultural traditions that I feel should be changed in the spirit of, and for the sake of Islam.

When you use the term "fundamental" or "fundamentalist Islam " you of course are refering to the extremists who use Islam for political agendas which have no relationship to the teachings of Muhammid(saw), in just the same way "fundamentalist" christanity has little to do with the teachings of Jesus and more to do with the establishment of and furtherance of political agendas.
You discribe the excesses of 2 Islamic countries, Afghanistan and Saudi, without mentioning that they are the minority and that there are 70 majority muslim countries in the world, such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Tunisia, Iraq, etc, etc..You refer to a small percentage of the Islamic world, not the majority.

No, my friend, I would not call you racist. You make the mistake many westerners do, when you hear muslim, you see an arab face. This is a conditioned response.

And as for the evil that has been perpetrated by "christians" to themselves and others, I need not address that, history is rife with examples both ancient and modern, except to say that real Christians are a differnt breed from "christians" and would never do any of these evil things if they follow the teachings of Jesus.

Peace

[Blue_Chill]

11. Who needs extremism to disrespect women?

Sure Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia are extremes, but even the more mainstream nations that you listed are far from embracing equal rights. There are some shining examples to the contrary but for the most part there really is no comparing the two.

This is not an attack on the Islamic faith, I believe all religions have to go thru a period unrest before they do what is right and advance towards the future. I believe this period is currently underway in the Islamic world as it was in the Christian world not to long ago.

Now the old world christians are seen as kooks and the minority. Thank God.

[Oilwellian]

8. May I make a suggestion

Google the words "Dominionism" and "Christian reconstructionists" and spend the rest of the day educating yourself.

[RainDog]

9. reality check

as noted, you equate right wing extremist versions of Islam with the entire belief system.

by your way of thinking, all Christians and all Jews embrace the most extreme faction of their religions, and both of those extremes advocate the same sort of theocracy and repression of women that their partners in crime in Islam do.

Unfortunately, in this country we have had "good religious people" who have consistently been on the wrong side of the important social issues of our time and before.

the Bush league is allied with these very same forces, who want to restrict women's lives in this country.

The only reason they have not been allowed to get away with this is because of the secular foundations of our nation, based upon Enlightenment ideas of liberty, equality, and humanity.

Even those foundations could not overcome issues like a woman's right to vote, or a black person's full humanity against the tide of religious repression of their eras.

It has taken years of education to undo some of the damage caused by religious indoctrination, The task is not over, and must be reiterated with each generation.

As mentioned before, look up articles online about the guy, a rep. from California, and about the way the repukes were so in love with the Taliban because they seemed like "moral people."

They supported a regime which institutionalize the repression of females.

It's just like the repukes in Chile, in fact. The same issue, with a different face.

Repukes assassinated liberal leaders, Letelier, Gen Rene Schneider, supported a coup against Allende, installed a MURDEROUS, HORRIFIC criminal, Pinochet...

and why? Because the people of Chile voted Allende into office and threatened Pepsi and Exxon.

They supported the Taliban for the same reason, and didn't care what happened to females in Afghanistan.

so they have NO MORAL AUTHORITY to talk about women under repressive regimes.

not to mention that now that they've overthrown Saddam, women are looking at the abrogation of their rights under Sharia, rather than secular law.

That's pretty hypocritical for them to talk about women's rights when it was pretty much a given, before the invasion of Iraq, by people who knew the country, that such a scenario was the likely outcome, and if not, civil war would ensue to stop this scenario.

So, according to that logic, they should have supported Saddam, since he was secular... and in fact, they did support him, until they wanted a base in the region for American presence and an oil subsidy to call their own.

[philosophie_en_rose]

10. Feminists were the FIRST to question Muslim Fundamentalism.

Since the beginning of the Taliban's control of Afghanistan in the 1990s, Feminist Majority has fought for the rights of women.

Feminists risked their lives to document the horrors under the Taliban. They videotaped executions, ran schools for girls, and provided support when everyone else was ignoring Afghanistan.

And, unlike the Bush administration, the feminist support does not waiver when the press turns its back. FEMINISTS are still there.

http://www.feminist.org/afghan/facts.html

Screw the Washington Post.