Wizbang has the story.
This has been going on for a long time. Feminists have long ignored the plight of Muslim women, while conservatives who supposedly don't care about women have been the only champions of women's rights in the Islamic world. See my articles on this: "Feminists Betray Muslim Women"; "The Conservative Vanguard of the Feminist Movement"; and "Two Women Stoned: Feminists Mum" (with David Horowitz and Janet Levy).
I call it whimmitude. So far no one has tried to stop me. I'm just lucky.
Howdy Dowdy,
You know Muslim men are allowed to not only marry, but divorce pre-pubescent girls, right?
You know sex-slavery is OK right? The concubines are called Possessions of the Right Hand.
You know Muslim women are forbidden from marrying non-Muslim men right?
Most interestingly, your refusal to acknowledge mistreatment of women in Islam speaks much more about you, than it does about the brutality of Islam.
You know, I bet you'd barely be able to get 10 of the 100 questions from the Crossword Puzzle regarding Islam and Muslims. It's free, and the answers are provided, but I'd bet you won't even attempt it.
Not sure which is worse, deliberate ignorance or blatant cowardice.
Crossword Puzzle and Word Searches
Good points, but with a whiff of 'Tu Quoque'
You can't defend one flawed organization by pointing at another. Even if it's worse.
I bet Muslim women the world over are thanking their lucky stars that they don't suffer the humiliations that Catholic nuns endure, right Maureen??
I remember how back in the '90's I used to respect Maureen Dowd.
This issue has been annoying me for a very long time.
I don't write much any more, but last week I just had to say something.
http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2009/10/is-feminism-deaf-to-women-in-islam.html
You can accuse me of shameless self-promotion if you must, but I am looking at the bigger picture and hope no one is offended.
I concluded long ago that Maureen Dowd had real writing ability but it was all wasted on a petty mind. Damn shame.
"Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"
Invites to lavish Georgetown cocktail soirees for an elegant evening of vacuous, liberal back-slapping, head-nodding, and (you'll pardon the expression, but it's only to be taken in the strictest inoffensive, non-spiritual terms) choir-preaching should NEVER take the place of standing up for those who continue to suffer in obscurity because your own personal political vendettas prohibit you from factually covering what is really happening.
After all, names would have faces, and tyranny would be exposed in all of its naked deformity...and who needs that, right?
Shame on you.
What can one expect out of a poisonous pit viper like Dowd who embodies all the dysfunction and hypocrisy of the liberal feminist movement in one nasty package.
Look the thing is the contemporary feminist movement is really about elevating emotionally brittle, white upper class women who don't work for a living into thinking that white males are the cause of their problems and bashing Western Civilization that gave them rights women nowhere else have.
Also Feminism isn't about lifting up Juanita the maid that feeds and clothes the white upper class feminist and raises her children because the feminist has more important things to like going to parties and faux protests.
Hell feminists wouldn't be caught dead associating with housewives or mom's who work part-time and take care of the kids.
And feminism is definitely not about fighting for the rights of women living under Islam. As stated earlier its about bashing white males and Western Civ.
"And feminism is definitely not about fighting for the rights of women living under Islam. As stated earlier its about bashing white males and Western Civ."
And wives and mothers.
"Men are (meant to be righteous and kind) guardians of women because God has favored some more than others and because they (i.e. men) spend out of their wealth. (In their turn) righteous women are (meant to be) devoted and to guard what God has (willed to be) guarded even though out of sight (of the husband). As for those (women) on whose part you fear ill-will and nasty conduct, admonish them (first), (next) separate them in beds (and last) beat them. But if they obey you, then seek nothing against them. Behold, God is most high and great." (4:34)
Does the arabic word "waidriboohunna" mean to "beat them"?
According to lane lexicon, arguably the best arabic-english dictionary, page 1779 Left Column & 1780 Middle Column Part 5.
Idriboo hunna means to neglect, ignore, avoid, or turn away from strife. It can also mean 'beat'. However, according to the verses in the quran that the husband is obligated to treat their wives nicely & with kindness, then what logically follows as to the meaning of Idriboo hunna with regards to that context should be obvious.
For the Left, the feminists are but an extension of the Marxist Left, the ultimate goal is the destruction of Western civilisation and its root – Christianity. This is also the aim of Islam, and so it follows that they are ideological allies.
Their hatred of Western civilisation and Christianity is visceral enogh that it prevents them from acknowledging their mutual incompatibilty. But if they ever defeat or destroy Western civilisation, they will then start the ultimate war for who governs the world.
It is our duty to prevent that, while at the same time remaining civilised – tough call.
Dowd is very brave to raise these issues.
After all, she faces a backlash from enraged Catholics throughout the world, calls for her to be executed for insulting catholicism, papal bulls urging the faithful to attack her and burning of her books.
While I have never understood the reasoning behind why women "can't be" priests (the Magdalene seemed to be at least as devout and close a follower of Jesus as the male apostles - particularly if, as I suspect, she is the same person as "Mary of Bethany", the one who anoints Jesus' feet in what seems to me to be a kingship (coronation) ritual), it's really a fairly minor "rights" issue. Also, upon reflection, it occurs to me that it's the nuns that are really higher profile in the general public - they actually DO things; there have always been nursing orders, and teaching orders, and the ones who run charity shops, etc. Also, being a nun is voluntary, and anyone may leave the convent at any time, if they feel it is right for them.
As for their being "submissive", I dunno. I know lots of people who went to Catholic schools when they were young, and they're still scared to death of nuns; or at least of getting cracked over the knuckles with a ruler. :) (I'm old, we used to get the strap in public school, so don't jump on me about that remark!)
I also think of the most famous nun of all, Maria von Trapp. It seems that even the Mother Superior knew she was not really cut out to be a nun, and when they parted ways, there was no harm, no foul on either side.
Yes, the wimple/habit are symbols of their religion, but again, it's only for nuns, not the general Catholic female population (and at least you can see a nun's face.) Most working nuns now don't even wear the habit, and haven't had to for years. It's just not practical in, say, modern nursing. And they don't demand that others dress like themselves.
Compare this to Islam, where the outfit is obligatory on all women, (even non-Muslim ones if they got their way), where women must REALLY be submissive, where they can be and are killed for trying to leave the religion.
Also, unlike Mrs Von Trapp, a true Muslima would never teach children the joys of singing.
JewLover
"Not sure which is worse, deliberate ignorance or blatant cowardice."
How about your issue? Insistant Ignorance?
You hold on to ideas about Islam that are, for the most part, easily disproven.
Those that are not entirely false are most often purposeful misdirections from the truth...a trail of half truths leading to one big lie.
Just a general statement, but, generally true.
Peace
Adbullah
"Not sure which is worse, deliberate ignorance or blatant cowardice."
Since it is patently obvious that the vast majority of Muslims (>99.9%) display both odious characteristics in equal measure in the end it really doesn't matter.....