|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
 Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 4:37 am Post subject: THE OTHER SICKNESS WITHIN ISLAMIC SOCIETIES |
 |
|
We all know that terrorism is the greatest sickness of modern Islamic societies from Saharan Africa to Indonesia. We know that countless number of imams, mullahs, religious lay persons, and ordinary Muslims either actively encourage it or otherwise condone it.
But what of the the other sickness infecting this religion?
| Quote: |
| I'm speaking of honor killings. According to a recent report (Nov. 15, 2006) by the renowned Center of Islamic and Middle Eastern Laws in London (among other reports), "The practice of honor killing is over-whelmingly associated with certain Muslim cultures and the peoples influenced by those cultures." |
Sadly, these are not isolated incidents. The UN Population Fund estimates that at least 5,000 women and girls are stoned and beaten to death every year, while another 12,000 are severely injured or maimed for life. And these are only the cases reported to local authorities.
Now some of the Muslim apologists on this board might ask: ah, but this savagery must be confined to the most backward societies.
In fact it is not only found in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Syria but also Egypt, Morocco, Palestine, Iran, and supposedly more enlightened societies like Jordan and Kurdistan.
Ah, the Kurds. Despite their relatively peaceful society, the other day a group of men (including brothers of the victim) kicked, beat, and stoned a 17 year-old girl for have the audacity to date a boy who is a Sunni Muslim. And they did it in public in the presence of police before video cameras. How quaint.
Lest the apologist think this is the result of vigilante justice, ALL of the countries listed above (and there are others) have codified honor killing into law.
Jordan is often held up as an example of a moderate Arab state (moderate only when compared to its fanatic neighbors). The AP, however, recently reported the case where a father shot and killed his teenage daughter for being promiscuous evne after a medical exam confirmed she was sitll a virgin. He walked free.
Which brings me to say something bound to spark controversy.
I have nothing but utter contempt for the current male domination of Muslim societies.
Any society that does not treat its women worse than its livestock is uncivilized. The Middle East and North Africa is run by men for the benefit of men. Women are held as much in suspicion as in high regard. They are at times like chattel.
Honor killings are almost exclusively of women and girls. Men and boys "guilty" of the same crimes are almost never punished.
Throughout the Middle East, women's groups are beginning to spring up in larger and more cosmopolitan areas. Many are motivated by feminist justice and rightly so.
Which brings me to the next point. No society that degrades women in practice as often and to the degree that most Muslim societies in the Middle East do can ever hope to be democratic.
The Arabs are tribal first and foremost. Tribal allegiance, loyalty to the blood line, the sheiks and so on always takes precedence over allegiance to the state.
You can't even have real nationalism when tribalism (with its manifestation of honor killings) abound.
And you can't ever hope to have any semblance of democracy where there isn't at least nationalism and half the population is thwarted in their individual and collective efforts.
Tell me most Muslim societies aren't more tribalistic than nationalistic. Prove to me that honor killings are justified by some bullshiite code of cultural relativism.
Let all the cultural relativists exclaim the fiction that all societies are of equal merit and worth and that while we might deplore this practice we shouldn't judge. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
McGarette,
That's fair and it is horrible. But let's be fair, this sort of thing is a "human' problem. One , your agenda doesn't want to look or check or even put on its list. Only say, We are the champions, everyone else is horrid....
This statement in particular is very ethnocentric and is as heavy with betrayal as the brill cream in your hair....
| Quote: |
| Which brings me to the next point. No society that degrades women in practice as often and to the degree that most Muslim societies in the Middle East do can ever hope to be democratic. |
GROSS. Simpleton. And not acceptable of a "scholar" on any level. You are a bigot for writing and not righting that.
Further, let's also for the sake of balance reveal for others that the U.S. of A. is by far the most prevalent beater and abuser of women. Not just in reports of wife abuse but also of under reporting of spousal abuse/ girlfriend battery. These are facts, given by international (but as you will say, left wing agencies....ah yes, for you everyone in disagreement is a communist, a bla bla bla.....). If you want the fact, I'll sprout a list that won't even make you puke (yes, your soul is stone). So just ask.
Please be fair minded in your reporting. This post is just bashing, after its first part. I'd appreciate you posting without the usual moralizing force of empty wind bagness.....
DD
| Quote: |
According to retired New York City Police Department Sergeant Bob Weir, a spouse is generally the top suspect in a homicide.
Seventy-four percent of all murder-suicides involved an intimate partner such as a spouse, common-law spouse or ex-spouse.
In 1976, 54% of people in first marriages described themselves as "very happy." Twenty years later, just 38% of people in similar circumstances described themselves that way.
Seventy-one percent of those murdered by their spouses are women.
Twenty percent of married women said they were "not sure" they would marry their husbands again, according to a Woman's Day survey. A third claimed they would "definitely" not pick the same spouse again.
Couples today are having a harder time achieving long-term wedded bliss than in any period over the last 40 years, according to the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University.
Between 1976 and 2004, 41,772 people were murdered by their spouses.
Having a gun in your home makes it three times more likely that you or someone you care about will be murdered by your spouse.
Ninety-two percent of those who report being assaulted by an intimate partner are female.
In spousal murder cases, wives, more often than husbands, claim they acted in self-defense.
About 70% of spousal homicide victims were attacked while they were lying down, sitting down, sitting in the car, sleeping, or passed out.
Prison sentences for wives convicted of murder are, on average, about 10 years shorter than for husbands.
Women account for only about 10% of murder defendants. But for spousal murders, women make up more than 40% of defendants.
According to a study by the U.S. Department of Justice, wives accused of killing their husbands are acquitted in 12.9% of cases, while husbands who go to trial for killing their wives were acquitted only 1.4% of the time. Sixteen percent of female spousal killers received probation, compared to 1.6% for males.
About 70% of women who try to kill their husbands use a gun. Only about 2% use "blunt objects."
Over half of the defendants accused of murdering their spouse had been drinking alcohol at the time of the offense.
Women living in central cities, suburban areas and rural locations experience similar rates of violence committed by spouses or ex-spouses.
Killing one's husband is referred to mariticide. Murdering your wife is uxoricide. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
postfundie
Joined: 28 May 2004
|
| Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| That's fair and it is horrible. But let's be fair, this sort of thing is a "human' problem. One , your agenda doesn't want to look or check or even put on its list. |
wow your favorite response...wow no ideology can get any blame or be seen as causing a problem because hey.....It's a human problem.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ilsanman
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Location: Bucheon, Korea
|
| Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 7:13 am Post subject: yes |
|
|
| A 'human' problem that is almost solely a muslim problem. But remember guys, it's a big coincidence. Ddon't overgeneralize. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
While violence against women is in every society, what SM wrote about tends to happen in muslim cultures.
No matter what the arch-douchbag ddavid tells us, islam is in serious trouble. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
ddeubel:
One question for ya, Bruddah Love:
Does the U.S. or any other Western nation codify into law and promote through many of its religious institutions the honor killing of women?
Get back to me when you can answer that in the affirmative.
Otherwise, you're just ddrooling from the corners of your mouth as usual. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ddeubel wrote:
| Quote: |
| Further, let's also for the sake of balance reveal for others that the U.S. of A. is by far the most prevalent beater and abuser of women. Not just in reports of wife abuse but also of under reporting of spousal abuse/ girlfriend battery. |
Ddeubel, what are your sources for this? I've heard of some stats that some people claim prove what you are saying. However, upon closer examination, they turned out to be false.
| Quote: |
The inability to make simple distinctions shows up everywhere in contemporary feminist thinking. The Penguin Atlas of Women in the World, edited by geographer Joni Seager, is a staple in women's studies classes in universities. It was named "Reference Book of the Year" by the American Library Association and has received other awards. Seager, formerly a professor of women's studies and chair of geography at the University of Vermont, is now dean of environmental studies at York University in Toronto. Her atlas, a series of color-coded maps and charts, documents the status of women, highlighting the countries where women are most at risk for poverty, illiteracy, and oppression.
One map shows how women are kept "in their place" by restrictions on their mobility, dress, and behavior. Somehow the United States comes out looking as bad in this respect as Uganda: Both countries are shaded dark yellow, to signify extremely high levels of restriction. Seager explains that in parts of Uganda, a man can claim an unmarried woman for his wife by raping her. The United States gets the same rating because, Seager says, "state legislators enacted 301 anti-abortion measures between 1995 and 2001." Never mind that the Ugandan practice is barbaric, while the activism surrounding abortion in the United States is a sign of a contentious and free democracy working out its disagreements. Besides which, Seager's categories obscure the fact that in Uganda, abortion is illegal and "unsafe abortion is the leading cause of maternal mortality" (so states a 2005 report by the Gutt macher Institute), while American abortion law, even after the recent adoption of state regulations, is generally considered among the most liberal of any nation.
On another map the United States gets the same rating for domestic violence as Pakistan. Seager reports that in the United States, "22 percent-35 percent of women who seek emergency medical assistance at hospital are there for reasons of domestic violence." Wrong. She apparently misread a Justice Department study showing that 22 percent-35 percent of women who go to hospitals because of violent attacks are there for reasons of domestic violence. When this correction is made, the figure for domestic-violence victims in emergency rooms drops to a fraction of 1 percent. Why would Seager so uncritically seize on a dubious statistic? Like many academic feminists, she is eager to show that American women live under an intimidating system of "patriarchal authority" that is comparable to those found in many less developed countries. Never mind that this is wildly false.
|
I would have to assume that if, as you say, the USA was the number one country for wife-beating, that the percentage of females visiting emergency rooms as a result of domestic violence would be considerably higher than 1 percent of the total emergency room patients.
In general, I am not an admirer of Weekly Standard, and don't entirely trust Sommers' overall agenda. However, on that partiuclar issue, it seems to me that she has made a pretty clear presentation of the statistics.
Do you have any other statistics that back up your claims?
http://tinyurl.com/2wf3og |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Any society that does not treat its women worse than its livestock is uncivilized. The Middle East and North Africa is run by men for the benefit of men. Women are held as much in suspicion as in high regard. They are at times like chattel. "
Am I reading that right? LOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
McGarette,
I said clearly that I agreed with the "horror" of honour killing. Period. What I don't agree with us your making this into a moralizing, "us so righteous" issue. It is an issue of pursuing the rights of women -- not something to be put into the straight jacket of "religious intolerance".
Codified into law??? You mean Saudi Arabia? The U.S. ally? Other Muslim nations that I am aware of other than Iran and Yemen, do not have this codified into law. You are making a weak, weak point here and once again showing your "extremism"
On the other hand,
I've been writing and active on some level, for years, on the issue of domestic abuse. Terrible problem, so little addressed. A guy I admire and correspond with, Sam Hamill, has written so well on the subject and his idea that it is a problem of "power" and violence and not one of law or codes or religions, should inform us. I recommend his books of essays, in particular, The Necessity to Speak.
I have linked to a very thorough report from WHO below. I won't repeat myself and so have pasted something I've written many times on this forum. What it does show is that this happens in all societies, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, whatever the religion. No less, no more.
My main point is that it is incorrect, even self serving to push this issue into the straight jacket of "religion". It is not a religious issue. Further, we should be active in demanding ALL countries, not just those not our allies, be accountable for the abuses of women that occur in their territorities. YET at the same time, stop and look at ourselves. This demon is everywhere. Let's not fall into the trap of ethnocentrism....this is a problem facing all cultures and one which we must battle each day.
My own opinion, controversial as it may be, is that the greatest danger to women and one which we can do something about -- is small arms. Women and children are by far the greatest victims of these weapons. We'd be best to curb their proliferation - a proliferation that we in the west are VERY complicit in.
What riles me is the simplistic and wrong notion that domestic violence and abuse of women will decrease by such empowering facts as income/education. Simply wrong. The problem is deeper. As this other far reaching, broad study states.
| Quote: |
| Surprisingly, several measures of female empowerment�employment, education, or attitudes related to gender equity, such as believing that women have the right to refuse sex to their husbands�did not directly correlate in the study with a reduced risk of abuse. And women who make most of their household's decisions alone�such as whether to make large purchases or to have another child�were victims of domestic violence at the same rate as those with little say in the allocation of their family�s resources. Instead, the study found that women who made decisions jointly with their male partners suffered far less abuse. |
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2004/DomesticViolenceinDevelopingCountriesAnIntergenerationalCrisis.aspx
Here's a comment I found particularly poignant;
| Quote: |
| Yes, women in the United States have far more resources than Saudi women when trying to escape abusive situations, and the cult of silence around such violence has had holes poked in it here. For that, we can all thank feminism. But to claim that the cultural ills which promote and allow intimate partner violence exist there and not here is delusional to the point of being dangerous |
A good discussion here.
http://cathyyoung.blogspot.com/2005/10/feminism-multiculturalism-and-domestic.html
We can be sure that the U.S. does list high on the list of nations regarding domestic abuse. It is a major public health issue, if not the No. 1. Not a notion we want to face but it is the truth. Impossible to corrolate and amass statistics on this worldwide but we can list/name the risk factors. Alcholism, drug addiction, child beating , abuse, violence, violence related employment, access to guns, age difference (women older NOT younger), multiple marriages, etc..... Being Muslim is not a risk factor.......
| Quote: |
Domestic violence is a scourge on society, all societies. It is not more or less in any cultures and numerous far reaching and broad studies have shown such. It exists in all cultures and in all parts of the globe. It is a cultural specific evil and not one that is of religious origins. I am sure before Caine slew Abel, he damn sure beat his wife a lot more before it.
Adventurer mentioned that we should be concerned with women's rights. I agree. A horrible problem in many parts of the world. The U.S. being the least of them, many Muslim nations the worst of them. But there is little if no relationship between the increase in women's rights (education/fiscal independence/legal norm and rights / social support ) and a decrease in domestic violence. None whatsoever. Increasing women's rights is a great thing, but it is not a panacea vis a vis the issue of domestic violence. Nor does it seem policing and punishment seem to curtail or push down the growth of this but rather in studies, seems to be a symptom of problem as a whole.
When you have the United States up there with Pakistan and Kenya as a state with large problem of domestic abuse, the facts speak for themself (yes, say I am anti - American but I state a fact, not a slander). What helps women in America, is the great respect for their rights, but it does little to hinder the abuse endemic there and worldwide.
Estimated that 1 of 3 women will experience it in their lifetimes, at the hands of men. 1 in 5, in a very horrid form. I repeat, cuts across all nations, cultures, races, religions. But if anything does seem to be an indicator of "less", it would seem to be by having male youth avoid the gungho of "power" and male bonding. One statistic that speaks, is how those professions such as policing, crime/criminals, the military, security, professional sports - professions where aggression is seen as a plus in many circumstances -- these professions have astronomically higher rates of domestic abuse. The only other "tell" is that those who view and experience abuse when young, will tend to also abuse.
Last year, WHO did a very comprehensive, cross cultural, world wide, anthropological survey. Not reliant upon official statistics which for the most part are under reported and tainted.
http://www.who.int/gender/violence/who_multicountry_study/en/index.html
So let's stop this "blame the Muslims" and look within. Blame God if anything but stop there -- he made us capable of being monsters, all of us.
I had two sisters who went through this "shyte" and probably offered in the same off the cuff manner as so many here who argue to bomb and dehumanize so much of the human spectrum.
Here is a good chart about what happens in America.
http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2005/07/dv_stats.html?welcome=true |
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ddeubel imagined:
| Quote: |
| My main point is that it is incorrect, even self serving to push this issue into the straight jacket of "religion". It is not a religious issue |
Just can't bring yourself to admit that modern Islam is a very bad way, can you? Cling to that cultural relativism, oh thee of the naive flock. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
deleted for formatting errors, see below.
Last edited by On the other hand on Sun May 20, 2007 12:22 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ddeubel:
Thanks for the interesting links, and the commentary. However, at least one of your sources would seem to contradict the claim that I was asking you about....
Ddeubel wrote:
| Quote: |
Further, let's also for the sake of balance reveal for others that the U.S. of A. is by far the most prevalent beater and abuser of women.
|
The Commonwealth study wrote:
| Quote: |
The percentages of women who said an intimate partner had ever abused them ranged from 48 percent in Zambia and 44 percent in Colombia to 18 percent in Cambodia and 19 percent in India. (A 1998 Commonwealth Fund study put levels of similar violence in the United States at 31 percent.2)
|
Furthermore...
| Quote: |
Co-author Sunita Kishor, a senior gender specialist at ORC Macro, cautioned that survey questions differed across some of the countries, making absolute comparisons of domestic-abuse prevalence problematic.
|
Now having said all this...
If you're asking me to agree that 31% is too high a number, and that Americans(or anyone else) shouldn't try to minimize their own social problems by saying "yeah well at least we're better than those Muslims", then I would agree wholeheartedly. I also agree that the issue is not rooted in religion, though religion may play a part in upholding societal norms that developed on their own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
On the other hand wrote:
| Quote: |
| I also agree that the issue is not rooted in religion, though religion may play a part in upholding societal norms that developed on their own. |
So the Islamic fundamentalist interpretation of a women's proper position in society has no bearing on their actual social standing? Are you kidding?
And there is a HUGE difference between domestic violence that is illegal and for which there is refuge in civic organizations and honor killing that is sanctioned by law and custom for which there is no escape.
Nice try to apologize for Arab/Persian fanaticism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 2:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rather than regarding women as human beings equal to men, the Qur'an likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: "Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will" (2:223).
The Qur'an also declares that a woman's testimony is worth half that of a man: "Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her" (2:282).
It allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice" (4:3).
It rules that a son's inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: "Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children's (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females" (4:11).
The Qur�an tells husbands to beat their disobedient wives: "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them" (4:34).
It allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures �shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated� (65:4).
From Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch website. Follow the link to the actual koranic text.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/016518.php |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
postfundie
Joined: 28 May 2004
|
| Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Please! quoting the Koran might confuse DD into thinking that religion actually has something to with violence against women. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
