For Womyn's Sake!

Puzzletime, folks! Point out the things wrong in the quote highlighted below….

NOW Demands Access to Program Geared to Fathers - washingtonpost.com

It’s called the Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Initiative, and the Bush administration doles out up to $50 million annually to fund its programs to build job skills and help fathers connect better with their children. But the National Organization for Women says the effort is illegal because it’s only about men.

Answer: Ms. Gandy, since we are all about equal access, why have an organization that is ostensibly serving only women, as in the National Organization for Women? Why not National Organization for Organisms? NOO?

I think any group that pretends to care about women needs to be jumping up and down with joy when there is an initiative to help men become better fathers. It only benefits the mothers in the lower-income groups who most of the time are burdened with the care of their children as single moms when fathers don’t take any responsibility. Of course, if NOW had it’s way all those babies would have ended up aborted anyways, so what is the need for fathers…my bad!

Would NOW also oppose this program till the day men are able to give birth? There is a reason why women of my generation would rather not be called “feminists”.

Aggressive Women

Here is a post at Althouse blog about her exchange with another lady on a bloggingheads.tv segment. The comments grabbed my interest a lot more than the post or the bloggingheads.tv segment. A lot of the comments were saying Ann should be “embarrassed” for raising her voice at the other lady and seemed to be attacking her.

My response? So what? As some other commenters pointed oujt very quickly, would this have been such a big deal if it were two men raising their voices? I bet if one man attacked the other one verbally, the attacked man would have been told to take it like a man and not complain. A really disgusting display of the double standards against women on display.

Men are allowed to be passionate and angry - apparently, it is their God-given right and makes them more likeable. A woman who dares to raise her voice? What an effing embarrassment to the entire universe!

Evolution or devolution?

Here is a gem brought to us by Dr. Helen - Dr. Helen: The “Harmless” Habit that Turns Men off to You - who points out that Cosmo actually has to warn women that pissing off their prospective male partners by railing against the male gender in general is….gasp…counter-productive! Wow! Who woulda thunk that! Pissing off people doesn’t get them to like you…like, really deep, huh! You go, Cosmo!

This reminds me of the climactic scene of “Jerry Maguire”, where a bunch of divorced women sit together discussing how much the men in their lives sucked…right before the real suckfest that was the alien Tom Cruise saying to the retarded Renee that she completed him or something….

Sexism at the drop of the hat

Here is a post at Althouse, where Ann talks about Amanda Marcotte’s charges of sexism against the people who caused her to lose a plum role in the John Edwards campaign - Althouse: Marcotte blames sexism for her troubles.

Here is what I find galling - Amanda charges sexism and Ann agrees with her, but a look a little deeply into Amanda’s post -

I was aware that I didn’t exactly fit the image people have of bloggers who join campaigns — the stereotype being 30-something nerdy young white men who wear khakis and obsess over crafting their Act Blue lists.

Oh, I get it now - it is OK for women to call men nerdy, comment on their clothes and obsessions - not sexist at all, but when people point out Amanda’s anti-catholic rants and the erasure from her blog of truly sexist posts (take for example, her belief that the Duke lacrosse people were guilty simply because they were charged of rape), then people are just being sexist?

I have been in a mostly male environment ever since I joined engineering college and then went on into a career of software technology. I love my geeky credentials. I like the people I have worked with. It is really sad that instead of self-reflecting and trying to understand true hate is disgusting whether coming from a man or woman, Amanda simply chose to cry, “sexist!”.

The problem with crying sexism is that it cuts off any debate - once someone accuses you of being evil, how do you turn around and have a civil argument with that person?

Also, very interesting is the constant use of “young” when Amanda describes herself and herr friend - what is that supposed to mean? Seriously, how does this woman have any credibility left as a feminist or a woman?

Justice and the Criminal Lawyer

Dilip brought it to my attention as a comment to a post below, that the Jessica Lal case accused is now being represented by Ram Jethmalani - one of the most famous criminal defenders in India - Jethmalani wants Jessica case transferred to another court - News.Indlaw.com. I think my first reaction honestly, would have been an eye-roll saying, “here he goes again!”, referring to Jethmalani. He is of course, quite famous for taking up high profile cases - defending those who were undefendable if you take the media’s word for it.

I actually think it is awesome that there is someone who wants to make sure there is not a trial by media, but an actual serving of justice where even a criminal gets his day in court represented by a competent lawyer. There is always the problem that only the rich can pay for representation like this, which also leads to the notion that Mr. Jetmalani takes bug bucks to set criminals free. Considering the sensationalistic nature and coverage of the current media, I appreciate lawyers like Mr.Jethmalani who will make sure there is no pile-on and a decent trial that wouldn’t convict someone of things they haven’t committed just because the media might have found a convenient scapegoat to make their story.

Don't "Sheikh" it, baby!

Seriously, even if you don’t shake it, it is your own goddamned fault if you happen to get raped! Don’t you know you are just an “uncovered pice of meat”? Don’t blame the “cat” for eating you. Not even if you are an Australian teenager who has been brutally raped by a few racist “cats”. Don’t you get it? You asked for it by being a woman, an Australian and by showing your flesh around!

I have absolutely no words for how angry this makes me! No more than for all the PC-police already out in full-force trying to explain the fucking shit away. Remember the double standard. Always do! Publishing of cartoons making fun of a religion? Horrendous and worthy of rioting and murders. Calling teenage gang-rape victims as brining this upon themselves? “Diversity”!

Do you think it will be worth it for me to try and hold my breath for the “feminists” who defended the hijab will be outraged at this misogyny? I don’t think so!

All or nothing?

Here is something that Ali Eteraz has blogged about that almost reinforces my previous opinion that NGOs are practically useless when it comes to reform in places that need the most. They are usually in the forefront protesting in places where reform has already taken place, but stay conspicuosly silent in others.

What Is Happening To Women’s Protection Bill (Pakistan) ? Eteraz

Most of us have heard of the rape laws in Pakistan, where a woman needs four male witnesses or is convicted of adultery and is victimized once more. There are currently efforts underway to reform those laws, but HRW and other NGOs are opposing the reforms because they are not reaching far enough. It is absolutely admirable that these liberal groups want the laws to change overnight to make everyone equal in the eyes of law, but something tells me that the Pakistani women are willing to take anything they can get right now and keep chipping away at the unfairness.

I can also understand why the reformers are not going to shove too many things down the public’s throats - for a conservative society like Pakistan to completely come out and change is not going to happen overnight. You don’t want to provoke the society so much that the backlash turns back the clock even more. Let’s support reforms in all forms and not oppose them just because they are not all we wanted. Check out Ali’s post for a lot more commentary on the subject and more links.

A woman's worth

Here is a post from Ann Althouse about a Syrian program dissing Condoleezza Rice on her…looks of all the things - Althouse: “Her external ugliness reflects her internal ugliness.”

This is one of those things that pain me a lot about women speaking against women. It is never the capabilities of the woman that are called into question - it is always low-blows like her looks, her color, her marital status - what have you. The insults always spring back to how the woman compares to others in serving the patriarchy rather than what she is to herself and by herself.

I am sure many of us have heard women being catty on other women all the time. I admit I have done albeit in a jovial manner. If I were to insult another woman, I would make sure I would point out the flaws in her thinking abilities and intellectual capacity rather simply calling her a “cow”. How ridiculous that independent, successful women should still fall back to the age-old stereotypes of a geisha-like perfectness in a woman when it comes time to insult her.

Feminism under the hijab

Here is a post at Feministe about the story of a “brave” little girl who loves wearing the hijab - Feministe - Consider the Hijab: Blogging Against Racism. Apparently she is a brave feminist since she chooses to wear it and the hijab is not “foisted” on her by anyone else. Here is some food for thought - what if you were brought up in a culture and by parents who believe you are a slut for exposing your head and the only way you can be a good, little girl is by wearing a hijab or a long skirt or a chador or whatever it is that makes you a non-entity covered up by shapeless wear…is that foisting?

Just because someone ingrains in your brain since childhood that you are supposed to do something just because you are a girl and you believe it, does that mean those ideas were not foisted on you by a patriarchy?

I love the spunk displayed by the girl in standing up for herself and applaud the fact that she seems to be a confident young woman. Does that mean from now on we take the wearing of a veil by a woman as a feminist trait since she is standing up to the “sexualized” society?

Again, before people start putting words in my mouth, I am not saying the girl is wrong in wearing her hijab or that there is anything wrong with her at all - all I am saying is that it is a little nuts to equate her perpetuance of something that has had a long history of subjugation and oppression towards women as a feminist statement.

Remember, a lot of women willingly sat on the pyres to be cremated along with their husbands during the Sati days - does that make them feminists since they are standing up to the god-less morons who believe burning women is wrong? A wrong is a wrong regardless of the society it is being done in and regardless of the person carrying it out. It is quite disheartening to see feminists fall in the familiar trap of multiculturalism and endorsing things they shouldn’t.

update: Here is Gaurav’s take on a similar issue that raises some interesting questions about free will or lack thereof.

Sense or nonsense?

Here is the touching story of a woman who when pregnant, went off with two drunk strangers to have no-string-attached sex and feels terrible that one of them tried to have sex with her without putting a condom on. Any person who has tried to respond in comments about how risky it is to go off with drunk strangers has been rebuffed with “victim-blamer!” inspite of almost all of them bending over backwards to make sure that they say they are NOT in fact blaming the victim, but are trying to tell her how she can better handle certain situations. Implied in most of the righteously offended’s outrageous comments is that since you are asking a woman who is most likely to be a victim to be a little more careful, you are being all mean and oppressive to the matriarchy. The way I see it, if someone wants to rape, you can ask him to pretty please not to do it, but [s]he is going to do it anyways. It is not going to stop anything - till we live in a utopia where all men and women refuse to have non-consensual sex, what is wrong with asking a woman to be a little more careful?

Compare and contrast this hideously self-indulgent thought process to actual situations people live in where they could be gang-raped for being of the wrong caste, paraded naked because of stupid rumors and sexually harrassed to suicide in many cases in the name of eve-teasing. These are women who face real problems where the victim has absolutely no blame and is being victimized for the simple fact of being who she is. I find it very hard to sympathize with someone who knowingly puts herself in a stupid (yes, I said it - it was a stupid thing to do) situation when there are other real victims to be empathized with. File this under one more reason why I feel sick of a lot of Western-style feminism.

Just to add a little bit more to the topic, I am not saying I never put myself at risk. I have been incredibly naive and stupid at a younger age and did some extremely silly things just so I can gain acceptance of someone or to even just keep someone with me. That doesn’t mean I look back and say it was all my fault - I don’t blame myself for the stupid things while at the same time have gained enough from those experiences that I am not going to repeat that stupidity again.

I will possibly explain more and provide more links when I am not as tired or jet-lagged.

Feminists for Men!

You heard that right! Feminists are now realizing how far they have swung the pendulum for gender rights and are trying to correct the actual imbalance between girls and boys. Research already shows that girls have begun beating boys in almost all things, even starting from infant classes - trends that worry me as the mother of a son. Here is a Guardian article about feminist icon, Doris Lessing taking the boys’ side on the issue. I think it is commendable of her to realize that true equality is not gained by oppressing either gender but in treating all equally and making sure children and adults of both genders get equal opportunities to learn, grow and thrive. Here is a relevant excerpt from the article -

“It is time we began to ask who are these women who continually rubbish men. The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests. “Men seem to be so cowed that they can’t fight back, and it is time they did.”

It is going to take a feminist to question the other feminists and show up the plight of men in this society, because any man trying to do so is automatically regarded as a politically incorrect animal who is only interested in his patriarchy and the oppression of women. God forbid, anyone actually acknowledge that patriarchy is only a thing of the third-world countries and not the West.

(This link found via Trudy Schuett - her own take on the issue)

Multiculti fascism...

A long time ago, I wrote a post on muticulturalism (I will have to look to find the link) where I was making points very similar to the ones in this article by a Brit writer. I found these excerpts especially poignant and heart-breaking -

We have been acting as though there is one thing called “Muslim culture”, and elderly imams or enraged, misogynistic young men are its only voice. A few weeks ago, it was driven home to me how wrong this is. I wrote about how the best way to defeat jihadists was to empower Muslim women, and I was inundated with e-mails from Muslim women, many explaining how the logic of multiculturalism weakened their hand.

One, in particular, is worth quoting at length: “My younger sisters go to Denbigh High School [in Luton] which was famous in the headlines last year because a girl pupil went to the High Court for her right to wear the jilbab [a long body-length shroud]. Shabinah [the girl who took the case] saw it as a great victory for Muslim women … but what happened next shows this is not a victory for us.

“My sisters, and me when I was younger, could always tell our dad and uncles that we weren’t allowed to wear the jilbab. Once the rules were changed, that excuse was not possible any more so my sisters have now been terrified into wearing this cumbersome and dehumanising garment all day against their wishes. Now most girls in the school do the same. They don’t want to, but now they cannot resist community pressure … I am frightened somebody is going to fight for the right to wear a burqa next and then my sisters will not even be able to show their faces.”

How condescending must a group feel towards a culture to believe that they have to treat it just right, water it and grow it in petri dishes so they can look at the little displays and coo, :how adorable!” and pat themselves on the back for keeping the exotic species alive. How can they call themselves liberal or progressive when all they are doing is to strive to keep a culture backward, conservative and unchanged!

More on this a little later when I get some time - a truly heartbreaking story via the Asianweek…coming soon!

The Abortion Debate - some stats.

All stats in post are from About.com who I think is fairly non-partisan. All statistics I am putting in here are for the US only, since this is the only situation I know enough to comment about.

First, the numbers for abortions through the years as Niket asked…
1996 - 1,365,700 | 1985 - 1,588,600 | 1974 - 898,600
1995 - 1,363,700 | 1984 - 1,577,200 | 1973 - 774,600
1994 - 1,431,000 | 1983 - 1,575,000
1993 - 1,500,000 | 1982 - 1,573,900
1992 - 1,528,900 | 1981 - 1,577,300
1991 - 1,556,500 | 1980 - 1,553,900
1990 - 1,608,600 | 1979 - 1,497,700
1989 - 1,566,900 | 1978 - 1,409,600
1988 - 1,590,800 | 1977 - 1,316,700
1987 - 1,559,100 | 1976 - 1,179,300
1986 - 1,574,000 | 1975 - 1,034,200
[edited the figures above for readability]

In 2001, 1.31 million abortions took place.
What is more interesting of course, was this set of numbers that caught my eye -
25.5% of women deciding to have an abortion want to postpone childbearing.
21.3% of women cannot afford a baby.
14.1% of women have a relationship issue or their partner does not want a child.
12.2% of women are too young (their parents or others object to the pregnancy.)
10.8% of women feel a child will disrupt their education or career.
7.9% of women want no (more) children.
3.3% of women have an abortion due to a risk to fetal health.
2.8% of women have an abortion due to a risk to maternal health.

Which means that only 6.1% of the above abortions were medically necessary. All the rest, choices! Atleast 36.3% got the abortion since they didn’t want children just yet or that it will disrupt their career or education, in other words, having children would cramp their lifestyle.

Seriously, how many of these could have really been avoided by responsible use of contraception? One fact on the site says 54% said they used ocntraception during the month before they got pregnant - that leaves 46% using abortion as birth control. In all fairness, is it really fair to create a life and then destroy it just because you can?

I think the pro-life people are as much to blame in this as the pro-choicers. In their relegious zeal, a lot of them don’t support use of ocntraceptives (a few condoms would have Andrea Yates some good) and are trying to stifle research and availability of such emergency contraceptives as the RU-486 pill. I’d rather some one not conceive or get rid of the unwanted conception before there is time for it to develop than wait till the baby is big enough to present a grisly photo-op for the pro-lifers.

Mother of the Week!

Here she is, Folks! We are nauseated to present the [evil bitch] mother of the week to Michelle Shelton for her awesome understanding of parenting do’s and don’ts. I mean, who hasn’t slipped a little crack in their babies’ food now and then to “calm” them down? Fess up, y’all!

Woman Charged With Giving Crack to Son, 4

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) - A mother has been arrested on charges that she gave crack to her 4-year-old son to “calm him down.” Michelle R. Shelton, 32, of Kansas City, was arrested Thursday on a child endangerment charge. Police said the boy did not suffer any obvious injuries from taking the highly addictive drug. He remains in state custody.

While I am glad the boy didn’t suffer any “obvious” problems from her mother’s administrations, I have got to wonder at the logic of trying to give someone crack to calm them down - I am no expert on drugs, but I have never heard of the tranquilizing effects of crack, only that it might get you hyper…Hmmm…

Not that you would care...

but this was the reason I was in a pissy mood the whole of yesterday. This was the first thing I heard on the radio as soon as I got into the car to leave to work. My heart broke for the little girl!

MSNBC - Mother confesses to severingbaby’s arms

PLANO, Texas - With a calm and dispassionate voice and a hymn playing in the background, Dena Schlosser confessed to the unthinkable, telling a 911 operator she’d cut off the arms of her baby girl. The woman was sitting in her living room covered with blood when police arrived Monday. Her nearly 11-month-old daughter lay fatally injured in a crib in a bedroom of the family’s apartment in Plano. The child died shortly afterward at a nearby hospital.