An essay by Joss Whedon

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/18/iraq.honorkilling/index.html]The CNN report is here.[/url] They've even got a video of those fucking goddamned barbarians killing that woman. Sorry, but this just makes me see red. I just noticed now that my teeth have been clenched for the last several minutes!

P.S. Before anyone freaks out, yes, I meant "barbarians" and I would say it about any troglodyte male who beats or kills women in any country. I'm not using the term to refer to guys "over there" who do shit like that.

There is an incredible advertising campaign going on in the TTC, which shows an extremely badly beaten, naked pregnant woman. Women get beaten to death by pissed off male relatives here, too. Lots of fucking barbarians to go around worldwide, unfortunately for us.

[ 21 May 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

Yeah, that's the problem, isn't it, SA? They report on this in full colour with video because they want to get across the idea that the Iraqi people are somehow "savage" in comparison to us. But you know, I'm betting that if the current population of the US or Canada lived in a war-torn, former dictatorship propped up by imperialists who then turned on the dictator, and supported that dictator's use of force and establishment of laws that allowed (or at least looked the other way) this kind of brutalization of women, you'd find an awful lot of "guys next door" pulling this sort of power trip shit on their women too.

The only reason the guys who are doing this shit to women here behind closed doors aren't doing it in the streets here in broad daylight is because they're not allowed to. But you can bet that there would be families here who would pull this shit publicly too, if they thought they could get away with it.

Yeah, this will get a lot more air time than those US soldiers who got drunk, raped the kid and murdered her family.

it is naive to believe this happened because of the U.S.'s occupation of Iraq. Its just getting reported more because Amnesty International and the News Media have greater access to the country.

this is a world wide problem,

A woman was [url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23394793-details/'Mother-in-law+lured+wife+to+India+for+honour+killing'/article.do]murdered [/url]by her mother-in-law and husband after disgracing her Indian family by having an affair, a court has heard.

or another incident

Mrs Ali and her unborn child both died following the [url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23396148-details/Family+quest...'honour+killing'+of+pregnant+teenager/article.do]attack[/url]
at her home in Bury, Greater Manchester, on Friday.

[ 23 May 2007: Message edited by: TemporalHominid ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
[b]
You are correct what are you going to do with sexism in your own country/community, or is it someone else's problem to do something about it?[/b]

---

give me 3 reasons why I must report to you and account to you about what I am doing in my community?

Why do you assume my attitude is that it is someone else's responsibility to "do something about it?"

While I teach I make it known that my classroom is a safe place for all students...
I am involved with special Olympics, an advocate for people with disabilities, and I am ally for GLBT students in my school district (Safe Places initiative). I am an ally with Muslim women that have educated me about their concerns about Sharia Law, and patriarchal attitudes. We should not legally sanction religious-based arbitration's, it infringes on the rights of Muslim women and children. I am an ally for the local Unity house. Working and coordinating information for students, families and when they need support duing crisis. I facilitate prevention programs addressing child sexual abuse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
[b]Oh I see, it is someone else's problem, not yours, you are to busy pretending your doing something to further the feminist cause eh, by listing those "others" out there killing women and children??[/b]

---

You are very poor at monitoring my behaviour and attitudes. I am sure you have other skills you can develop and focus your energy on, because you are not very good at mind reading, monitoring citizenship or profiling individuals. Again I am confused as to why I have to report to you to account for what I do in my community. What authority do you have?

[ 23 May 2007: Message edited by: TemporalHominid ]

Yes, this is a horrible incident, no question about that.

However, I have huge concerns when this thread is quickly turning into how sexist and misogynist those "people over there" can be. What began as a report on a recent "newsworthy" event has quickly deteriorated.

We can break this down in a number of ways.

*Why is this particular horrific story newsworthy, and when I say newsworthy I mean to the West? Atrocities happen everyday.

*Because the young woman was young and "media friendly"? (Code for "pretty"?)

*Because the story helps to reiterate racist stereotypes?

*Because the story will enrage (as it should, as all sexist violence should) AND allow the mainstream to feel, on an emotinoal level, that it's okay to be over there killing brown men, since they ultimately deserve it if they do "stuff like that"?

*Because the story didn't involve US military personnel, at least not directly?

Finally, I'm not the moderator here, but I have to say that if all we have on babble are each others' words, the "progressive cred" challenge is getting tired, and read like personal attacks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
[b]*Because the story will enrage (as it should, as all sexist violence should) AND allow the mainstream to feel, on an emotinoal level, that it's okay to be over there killing brown men, since they ultimately deserve it if they do "stuff like that"?

[/b]

---

I think you nailed it there, especially considering that CNN has the video up.

I guess I have to come back now and say that the pile-up on remind isn't nice and I don't like it.

Everyone who knows me here knows that I have *ahem* strong opinions. I know, I know, I get the Understatement of the Year Award for that one.

I try, most of the time, to get people on what they are actually saying and claiming. And yeah I've gotten on about people's opinions when I don't agree with them. That's all fine. I don't even think we HAVE to be all nice and polite all the time, I sure as shit am not always that way. [img]redface.gif" border="0[/img]

And I've never been a fan of the pile-up either, and not just because I'm so often the lone or one of two or three voices either. I don't think it's fair, or in "good faith" or anything like the at least veneer of social intercourse that I like to think we try to do here.

So, someone, please save this and throw this in my face the next time I get all ornery about some lefty being inadvertently racist, 'kay?
[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
[b]You have me wondering WTF.[/b]

---

Hmmm, let's see now what temporal provided for us to read, absorb and internalize. Once something is internalized, with very little critical thought given, a reactionary position has been created, the pump is primed so to speak.

So, here we are being primed with:

quote:

---

it is naive to believe this happened because of the U.S.'s occupation of Iraq. Its just getting reported more because Amnesty International and the News Media have greater access to the country.

[b]this is a world wide problem,[/b]

---

*bolding mine

Starts off all good eh, provides a scenario that this didn't happen because of the US occupation of Iraq. Does not provide proof, just makes a blanket statement, in face of the utter destruction, chaos and insanity currently in Iraq, that the USA has caused by their invasion and occupation. First off, it minimizes US cupability, and then it distorts the truth, but it is accepted, because the reading audience have moved along already to the next sentence of:

"this is a world wide problem"

It was made separate and short, and it actually has truth to it. Ergo, the first premise is also either forgoten about, or accepted as correct too. Iraqis bad USA good.

Now, it also has a 'get on board appeal, because it is something we all can agree with. Of course, we all know, or should know, that there men are harming women, while others in society look on doing nothing, all around the world, all the time. As of yet, it really does not appear that bad in your internal dialogue, nor in your cognative thought processes. Even though it is a truth lie of the worst sort.

Now, we have bounced along with our truth, and false fact, that has been accepted as truth, to the examples given to support this stated premise of; it happens all around the world.

There has been no mention really of religion, culture, or race, other than Iraq/USA to this point.

Then come the examples, have a look at them.

Clearly present, when one has finished reading them, is religious/racial/cultural fanaticism, and bias against it being presented, even though it has not been said.

Nonetheless, it is present and it has been internalized to a reactional awareness of those "others" over there. You know, those "others" who are now living in countries they, or their ancestors, are NOT from. Those "others" who are doing things like this, against the dominent culture's laws and ideology, say nothing of how it is actually tarnishing ALL within those example dictates as being capable of doing this.

So, now we have a whole mentally constructed scenario that has been internalized.

Many do not see the subtle slanting of bias towards topics being discussed and bandied about in the "after 911" world which are: halting multi-culturism initiatives, halting immigration form countries where those "others" are from, and perhaps even a hint that there should be some stopping religious freedom of those "others".

As below:

quote:

---

A woman was murdered by her mother-in-law and husband after disgracing her [b]Indian family[/b] by having an affair, a court has heard.

---

And so here we have the "others" being "Indian", no real specified Indian, just that implication and broad brush. Catches them all, so people just insert their own image of Indian. And now we have anothetr emotional description, further slanting towards an internalized bias, against the "others", only now the "others" have a name.

What comes next? An example of a white man that has hunted down and murdered his wife, for no damn reason other than control based upon objectification? And frankly, that is actually what the other, so called "religious" murderous actions are. It has little to do with religion, and everything to do with controlling women by fear and violence.

But no, what comes next, is NOT an example of a white man murdering his wife, while others failed her, and there are plenty available out there to use. I mean, if "it"--being women murdered by those who profess to love them-- and it is happening "world wide" one would think there should be a white fe/male example, eh?

By failing to be inclusive to ALL cultures and races? And presenting a targeted segment of society, there is now an internalized scenario of, white good, brown bad.

Because as we can see below, it is not a white person exanmple, it is another example about another "brown" family, living in a country where they are not originally from, who murder someone they have professed to care about...

quote:

---

or another incident

Mrs Ali and her unborn child both died following the attack
at her home in Bury, Greater Manchester, on Friday.

---

And there we have it, the Muslim family, are now playing the role of "others" who do this around the world.

The tone/message for the flight or fight response is set, men only murder their wives if they are NOT white.

That is a dangerous message to spread.

Violence against women, occurs no matter the colour of the skin, or religion. It is about dis-empowering women and controlling them.

Presenting men, or families murdering, a women as a religious and racial problem of the "others" is ugly IMV, and truly should not be accepted.

Which is why I asked temporal what he was doing in his society to stop violence against women by other men. Because it seemed as though he was in denial, at minimum, about who murders wives and why "aroubnd the world". I wanted to see if he acknowledged "white" men murdered their wives, and if he knew about violence against women causes and facts. I wanted to point out that this is not an "others" problem.

There was no purpose, or acknowledgement given, in response. Defensive posturing occured instead of presenting a clear reason of why it was slanted, or even acknowledging is was slatted.

That leads one has think; "was there a purposeful, and subtle racial and religious slanting against the "others"?

Or is that how insidious it is now in our society, having being placed there prior and people just say this type of slanted bigotry without understanding the actual implications.

This type of commentary is setting the tone for other little indoctrinational goodies, where all of a sudden people are wrongly becoming fearful and want; multiculturalism stopped, immigration of the "others" from "those" countries is halted, and freedom of conscious/religion is halted or curtailed, for secuity reasons.

Now, I am not saying it was done on purpose, but it does not matter, this type of thing fosters sub-conscious bigotry, so that when an emotional event happens, people are primed to react accordingly.

And it is almost exactly the same type of thing, just a different pile, as to what I took exception to, prior.

It is what is infered, and clearly stated, yet not stated, and this is most damaging to society,and destroys any ability for cooperation and diplomacy.

When emotions are high, reactions will occur and they will be based upon subconscious presumptions, that trigger fight or flight responses And they will, or could be, wrongly applied.

In this case, it is NOT just the "others" who do terrible things to women, including pregnant women, it is ALL peoples.

It is important to slowdown and actually see what exactly is being said. Especially when it is commentary about where we are at geo-politically and foreign policy wise.

There does not need to be tolerant discourse, over absolutely intolerant commentary, be it subconsciously said, or not. That type of slanted and essentially bigoted view/commentary needs to be aggressively taken exception to. Each and every time.

[ 24 May 2007: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jas:
[b]

What does this mean? Why would you use deliberately sexualized language in the context of this argument?[/b]

---

It is a term that means you can't play two notes similutaneously or by analogy you can't make two contradictory arguments at the same time. My understanding is it not a sexual reference but a harmonica reference. On a harmonica you get a different note depending on whether you suck or blow and you can't do both at once.

But thanks for wading in with a presumption and not a request for clarification. That IMO is the biggest problem on this forum.

I was unable to watch the video. Just wondering, though, how does our outrage fit in with respecting other cultures? I don't respect any culture that would allow such an atrocity. Am I thus a racist? Probably.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
[b]If a cultural dosen't harm people, it should be tolerated. If a cultural tradition kills or damages people, as is the case here, it should be condemned. Quite simple really.[/b]

---

But it's not simple, not at all. For these men involved, perhaps having a "tainted" woman in the family was a fate worse than being killers. If another culture follows that line of thinking, who am I to condemn it? (I do condemn it, btw, I'm just wondering how that fits in with cultural tolerance. Surely, we're not going to say that we're only tolerant of cultures that accord with ours. That would be, you know, imperialistic, no??

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
[b]I would have to agree.[/b]

---

So do you support the stoning of women, then? Great, good to know.

[ 27 May 2007: Message edited by: Phrillie ]