Men in my blogroll agree that only the males who paid for merchandise should be entitled to unwrap it. Everything else, they say, is un-feminist.
Male Feminism
Opinions, art, debate
Opinions, art, debate
Men in my blogroll agree that only the males who paid for merchandise should be entitled to unwrap it. Everything else, they say, is un-feminist.
Clarissa's Blog 
Grossly off-topic, but it seems that Colombia and FARCs made an agreement.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/farc-colombia-peace-accord-1.3734814
LikeLike
Mayor Elisabeth Herzog-von der Heide of the town Luckenwalde, in Brandeburg, fired an intern after one day because she would not take off her headscarf.
…
The Palestinian woman, 48, had been hired for a project called “Perspectives for Refugees” and was set to work for six weeks.
The woman said that she did not want to remove the headscarf in the presence of men, and therefore Herzog-von der Heide said they would not be able to offer her a suitable working environment.
…
A representative from the state parliament and Angela Merkel’s conservative CDU party, Sven Petke, criticized the Social Democrat (SPD) mayor.
“There is no legal basis for this decision,” Petke said, noting that the German Constitutional Court had ruled that personal beliefs and their connection to certain items of clothing should not be objectionable.
“It is something different than a crucifix on the wall.”
But members of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party praised the decision to dismiss the intern.
“If the cross is not permitted in the rooms of the town hall, then there should not be special treatment for Muslims,” said AfD state parliament representative Thomas Jung.
“The mayor deserves respect and not scolding for her uncomfortable decision.”
The debate about religious attire
Wearing a headscarf to work, especially in legal or public sector work, has been hotly debated in recent years across Germany
http://www.thelocal.de/20160825/mayor-fires-intern-from-refugee-project-for-wearing-headscarf
I agree with those who think that a headscarf “is something different than a crucifix on the wall.” Jewish women wear them too, and Christian religious women also used to do it.
LikeLike
“I agree with those who think that a headscarf “is something different than a crucifix on the wall.””
What about crucifixes worn on necklaces or as broaches?
What about a Sikh kirpan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirpan
What about skyclad neopagans? (nudity certainly has a longer tradition in Germany than headcovering does).
There’s also the pattern, well-known in Europe of one concession leading to demands for more.
LikeLike
In Montréal, there was a problem with a Kirpan that Sikh parents wanted their son to wear to school. Other parents objected for safety reasons. This was quite a young kid.
I’ll let everybody guess who ended up winning.
LikeLike
Turkey has around 6,000 informants working in Germany, which experts say means they’re each monitoring more people than the Stasi did in West Germany during the Cold War.
…
But the Stasi engaged primarily in gathering military, political or economic intelligence in West Germany, rather than targeting former citizens, as MIT seems to be doing in Germany, Schmidt-Eenboom said.
…
These informants are putting pressure on Kurds, Gülen supporters and others perceived as being opponents, for example by calling for boycotts on their businesses, writing negatively about them in Turkish publications, or threatening their family members.
“They can go to the regular German police to complain about it, but this is difficult to do in this kind of parallel society,” Schmidt-Eenboom said.
“The government feels that Turkey is an important partner in the refugee crisis, so they may turn a blind eye.”
http://www.thelocal.de/20160824/turkish-spies-in-germany-have-greater-scope-than-the-stasi
LikeLike
Interesting:
Травмирующая память и комплекс жертвы
http://trim-c.livejournal.com/1242549.html
LikeLike
I don’t understand this post at all.
LikeLike
My guess is that it’s about feminist (including male feminist) support for hijab, niqab and burkinis.
LikeLike
I simply find it hilarious how literally crowds of men (who never had a word to say about genital mutilation, sex trafficking, gender violence, forced marriages, femicide, etc) are all collapsing in anger over the burqaed woman on the beach in Nice.
Gotta love male solidarity. The second a fellow male’s right to treat a woman like his property is threatened, they rise in indignation. I only wish they had the same interest in the subject of paternal leave.
LikeLike
I’m going to push back a little at how you’ve framed this debate. From your retelling it would seem that men and women lie on opposite sides of the issue. Male solidarity vs female solidarity and all that. My anecdotal information (from looking at blogs/twitter) is that not a single woman I know supports this burqini ban.
The only women (other than you) that I see supporting this police act on the beach are the Ann Coulter types.
So, from my perspective, it looks more like:
Most men, most women on one side.
You, Ann Coulter alt-right fuck-islam Trump supporters on the other side.
LikeLike
Women are simply intimidated and browbeaten about the issue to contradict the irate male choruses. The amount of “thank you so much for saying this, I want to say the same thing, but I’m afraid” I’m getting in response is like no other posts I’ve ever written. All of the people who thank me in private are women.
So yeah, there are two sides to the issue of treating women like property of men.
LikeLike
Ah, the ‘silent majority’ argument.
Look, I’m just going to take people’s words at face value. On my blog roll, and on Twitter, I see literally no woman approving the actions of the French police. They’re not just silent, they’re passionately opposing it.
You can brush that aside by saying that they’re too weak to admit their true feelings. I think it would be sexist to assume that any woman disagreeing with you is only doing so because she’s not strong enough to vocalize her position in public.
LikeLike
“Ah, the ‘silent majority’ argument.”
“On my blog roll, and on Twitter, I see literally no woman approving the actions of the French police.”
LikeLike
The problem with the burqini is that it’s not happening in a vacuum.
If this were simply a case of a religious minority who wanted to dress a little differently then that would be one thing.
But it’s not happening in a vacuum. And the overall context is pretty disturbing for anyone who cares about womens rights or secular rule of law.
It’s pretty obvious that the ban will end in failure, which will be a triumph of patriarchical aggression against modern secularism and egalitarianism. And will lead to more demands for special treatment.
My best guess is that the next big push (after muslims win the battle to cloak their women any way that muslim patriarchs want) will be for recognition of polygamy.
It already has passive de facto recognition in the UK but getting recognition for that in traditionally secular France will be a triumph.
Taxpayer supported FGM will not be far behind.
And feminists will support it all (which is why I’m not a feminist).
LikeLike
Secularism is not about irreligious legislation in public spaces. It’s about evacuating religions in the State and in politics.
Nuns and Hassidim costumes are not illegal in France.
LikeLike
And Burkinis are not “special treatment” since Nuns, Hassidim costumes and swinsuits are permitted.
LikeLike
This is why the buqini was a poorly chosen issue to make a stand over.
Though I wouldn’t have a problem with excluding hassidic swimwear on public beaches.
Nuns are slightly different since they are part of the clergy (so to speak).
And again, you’re looking at this in terms that are divorced from the larger picture. Are you prepared for Canada to recognize polygamy? Taxpayer funded FGM?
Lenient sentences for honor killings?
Where do you draw the line at state recognition of religious practice (as it affects women)?
LikeLike
Especially since any ridiculous barbarity can be called “religious” whenever it’s convenient.
The absolute majority of Muslims in the world don’t wear burqas. Most haven’t even seen them except on TV. This is not about Islam. It’s about male pigs and female freaks.
And by the way, the women under these shrouds tend to be angry as fuck. Of course, the stupid bints aren’t angry at the male owners who stuff them into shrouds. They are angry at normal women.
Living next to them and their rage is no walk in the park.
LikeLike
As for nuns, I can’t imagine them lying on beaches and wading into water in their attire.
LikeLike
Of course, but they can walk on the beach.
LikeLike
\The absolute majority of Muslims in the world don’t wear burqas. Most haven’t even seen them except on TV.
The absolute majority of Muslims in the Middle East have seen them, I am sure.
And Europe is receiving refugees from those countries.
\This is not about Islam. It’s about male pigs and female freaks.
I am with cliff on “for me the religion is what the people who claim to follow it do and not what the book they claim to follow it says.”
A holy book =\= religion. The cultural way of living and worshipping is.
LikeLike
“I am with cliff on “for me the religion is what the people who claim to follow it do and not what the book they claim to follow it says.””
OK. So if I kill infants and drink their blood and say I’m Jewish, it will make the blood libel true and acceptable?
LikeLike
As a secularist, I’m against the State recognition of religious practices, but this is not the topic here.
The line to draw is this: no discrimination and no privilege based on religions. Wearing a burkini is certainly not a privilege!
LikeLike
Burqas have nothing to do with any religion. It’s all a huge scam to sneak female humiliation into public spaces masquerading it as religion. In reality, there is no religion behind it.
LikeLike
I agree that this is a scam, but I don’t think law enforcement should have anything to do with this.
LikeLike
” It’s all a huge scam to sneak female humiliation into public spaces masquerading it as religion”
And don’t forget the consumerism! Haven’t you noticed all the articles pushing burqinis (and not just for muslims)?
In the modern world:
ideology is consumerism is ideology (and on and on)
“there is no religion behind it.”
Well modern muslim dress codes for women don’t have much to do about anything in the koran (the really dysfunctional stuff mostly comes from hadith). But as a behaviorist in religion, for me the religion is what the people who claim to follow it do and not what the book they claim to follow it says.
So part of modern Islam is indeed this hideous forms of segregationist dress for women.
LikeLike
\My best guess is that the next big push (after muslims win the battle to cloak their women any way that muslim patriarchs want) will be for recognition of polygamy. It already has passive de facto recognition in the UK but getting recognition for that in traditionally secular France will be a triumph.
cliff, what do you mean by “passive de facto recognition”? Family reunification laws permitting to bring several wives?
You do understand, I hope, that the moment you say “you are a refugee, bring your family,” you can not say “bring 1 wife out of 4, and 3 kids out of 12. Choose which. The rest may die for what we care since having several wives is illegal in EU.” It is ridiculous. If the cultures are so separate, do not accept refugees from there.
Even Israel with its ~ 20% Arabs, many of whom wear hijab, has not officially recognized polygamy and FGM is prohibited. You present a wildly exaggerated picture with “Taxpayer supported FGM.”
Btw, in Israel being anti-polygamy in practice did not mainly derive from any concern for women’s rights, it seems to me. Look at this article from 2003:
\The Interior Ministry, in a report entitled “Polygamy in Israel,” indicates that Israel is paying through the nose to 20,000 Israeli-Arab men who have married multiple wives from other countries
[…]
“The State of Israel, for known reasons, is a choice destination for non-Jewish immigrants from various other countries,” states the report, quoted in Maariv today, “and especially from Arab nations and the Palestinian Authority. This wave of immigration is very dangerous to Israel’s national security, presenting a security, criminal, and political danger, an economic burden, and especially a demographic danger for the future of the State.”
http://www.ourjerusalem.com/news20030206/
The law was changed fast, but it had no connection to polygamy. Here from Jun 17, 2015 :
\ The Knesset on Monday extended for another year the law that allows the government to avoid granting Israeli citizenship or residency status to Palestinians married to Israelis.
The legislation was formulated originally in 2003 as an “emergency” statute, and the Knesset has extended it every year since then for an additional year, based on security considerations. This time, 57 MKs voted in favor of the extension, 20 opposed it and five abstained.
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.661438
LikeLike
“what do you mean by “passive de facto recognition”
One sample:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3414264/Want-higher-benefits-marry-one-wife-New-welfare-rules-hand-extra-taxpayer-cash-polygamists.html
There have also been some BBC stalking horse articles about how unfairly second/third wives are treated legally (indirectly implying that UK law should recognize them)
” If the cultures are so separate, do not accept refugees from there.”
EXACTLY!!!!!!! When you let people into your country, you’re letting their values in with them. Why should a western country let the values behind polygamy into their country?
LikeLike
\Extra wives will be treated as single but they could claim single person’s benefits
In Israel something similar happens.
Found an informative recent (2016) article about polygamy and Bedouin women in Israel:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/the-sorry-plight-of-bedouin-women-trapped-by-polygamy/
LikeLike
Btw, I hope my governement will do something soon about this polygamy and mainly not because of women’s rights reasons, but for ones in this comment:
\When 30% – 50% of Bedouin families are “involved in polygamy” it should be understood that in those polygamous families there are not just 2 but sometimes 4 or more wives. The AVERAGE number of wives for each Bedouin male turns out to be TWO. What is completely forgotten in the blind eye turned by the state to all this–is that humans are born in roughly equal numbers male and female: so one of the two wives has to come from elsewhere. And elsewhere has meant, for 3 decades now–Hebron, Gaza, and sometimes Jordan. So the government is actively encouraging the Palestinization of Bedouin society. Fully one half of Bedouin children now have Palestinian mothers–Hamas or Fatah you take your pick. When is the government here going realize the implications of this? WAKE UP
The Bedouin woman in the article also understands this:
\In the end, Abu Shareb believes, it is numbers that may drive the Israeli government to enforce the anti-polygamy law in a bid to bring down the Bedouin sector’s high birthrate. “It will come from a place of demographic fear about the growth of Bedouin society, not the welfare of Bedouin society,” she said.
…
Polygamy is less prevalent in non-Bedouin Arab communities because the women there have better access to education than their Bedouin counterparts, Abu Shareb argued.
LikeLike
There’s also child marriage on the horizon (widely found in many countries supplying migrants to the West).
Salon ran a couple of articles hinting around the edges that pedophilia isn’t all that bad so expect immigrants to take those cultural threads and run with it so that men can sell their 10 year old daughters to 50 year old men as “wives”.
LikeLike
\There’s also child marriage on the horizon
In Israel, our religious fundamentalists offered in 2011 to lower marriage age from 17 to 15 since:
\ “There are many Hasidic communities that are interested in lowering the marriageable age, namely Vizhnitz and Breslov,” explained Rabbi Idan.
“Some Hasidic communities are already violating the law by marrying at the age of 15-16. Parents of large families who cannot financially support all their children would be able to marry off their daughter earlier so that she can move into her husband’s house,” he added.
“Girls who do not want to study or work are a burden to the household,” Rabbi Idan noted, “In my opinion, these young people will contribute more to the State because they won’t go to nightclubs or waste their time looking for nonsense someplace else.”
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4013584,00.html
Thankfully, our government did not cave in despite usually being in Haredis’ pocket. Instead, “Israel’s legal marriage age was increased from 17 to 18” in 2013. However, I am with Kobi Nachshoni who expressed “doubts that the Amendment Law would be successfully implemented in the haredi (Jewish ultra-Orthodox) community or among several Arab groups in Israel, where underage marriages are common.”
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4449902,00.html
Interestingly, one Haredi blogger expressed the opinion the increase’s goal was to have more people join IDF instead of escaping draft via marriage. 🙂
LikeLike
Oh yes, I remember linking to a preachy article on Jezebel or Feministing or whatever where people were admonished not to judge the parents who sell their daughters to old pervs because that’s these families’ “only way to survive.”
Once feminism manages to defend the burqa, everything else is totally off limits.
LikeLike
\OK. So if I kill infants and drink their blood and say I’m Jewish, it will make the blood libel true and acceptable?
No, you need a large enough group of people to join you in the enterprise to make the blood libel true.
LikeLike
How large? And what if the overwhelming majority of Jews doesn’t do anything of the kind?
Let’s remember that Judaism was equated with greed because a large enough group of Jews practiced usury. They practiced it for reasons that were not religious, but it’s not like anybody cared enough to make the distinction
LikeLike