Victimizing the victim

So an article has come to my attention that I could not ignore, and could not stay silent.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-15991641

A woman in Afganistan was put in jail for two year under the charge of infidelity. She tried to appeal this and her sentence was turned into 12 years - that's not the worst part.

The reason for her infidelity... she was raped - still not the worst part.

Her rape inpregnated her and she had a child in jail - it still gets worse.

There was a public outcry and a petition with 5000 signatures was presented to the president of Afganistan who offered her two choices:

1. Serve two years instead of the 12 she was sentenced or...

2. Marry her rapist.

Yes, that is the worst part of this story.

How can anyone believe that this is a fair alternative to jail? Or better yet how could anyone think that this is resonable... ever? The woman was raped... which is bad enough, and she is thrown in jail for being raped then they want to force this woman to marry and forever live with the man who violated her.

I don't think I can express how much it upsets me to live in a world where sh!t like this occurs, and how pissed I am in general over the situation this poor woman has found herself. I mean it... I'm so enraged that words are escaping me right now.

We live in 2011... things like this should not happen anywhere ever! Well you can bet now that this story has hit the blogosphere the president of Afganistan is going to get a petition with more than 5000 signatures.

Feminsim

So I decided to look at Conservapedia... which is a painful effing experience, but did come across something on their main page which needs to be addressed. They provide their own definition of feminism... which is total crap... I thought I would go through it point by point to show you what kind of crap it is.

Modern feminists:

• believe that there are no meaningful differences between men and women (The most significant belief underlying contemporary feminism is that there are no sex differences; therefore advocacy for equal rights must be extended to advocacy for equal results or outcomes.) 

- And your problem with this is? This is what they cite as sex differences: Peter A. Lawrence wrote, "... males on average are biologically predisposed to systemise, to analyse, and to be more forgetful of others, while females on average are innately designed to empathise, to communicate, and to care for others." - This is complete and utter crap. This is a completely biased viewpoint of the male and female roles which are not natural, but thrust upon them. None of the properties here are innate or genetic within males or females and are learned. Plenty of women are not empathic and plenty of men are not analytical.

• oppose chivalry and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes) 

- Some do and some don't. Must you lump people into single categories? I appreciate chivalry, but am also kind to other people, if someone holds a door for me I say thank you, but I will also hold a door open for others. Now there are a few chivalrous things I find demeaning, but those are ones that no-one does anymore. Though I do occasionally get irked with my male friends who don't let me walk on the outside of the sidewalk, but now it's more of a joke.

• view traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal 

- Could you define for me what marriage is traditional? Are you talking a marriage between one man and one woman? Because this is very recent. If you want to talk about traditional marriage as a marriage which has been around for a very long time is arranged marriages, and these types of marriages do often work out, but don't always, and in many countries do not take gays and lesbians into account. 

• belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family.

- Never in my life have I witnessed a single feminist do this. Feminism is about an individuals right to chose, if a woman chooses to have a family well then good for her. That choice may not be for everyone, but for those who it is that's great! 

• shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.

- Again Conserapedia I'm going to have to call bs. Traditional gender activities have not been traditional for very long. Textile production used to be a predominately male job, baking is something that both genders do. This seems to me that the people who "shirk" traditional activities are people who have found that they are not suited to them. I personally don't bake... but I suck at it... would you force my fiance to eat what I cook?

• support affirmative action for women 

- Uh... no. Feminists support equal rights, meaning that the person best suited for a job should be hired despite their gender, sexual orientation or skin colour. To whomever wrote this: The woman who got hired over you was more skilled and better suited to the job... get over it.

• prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do.

- Huh? Where the hell is this coming from? Pants are comfortable, and you don't have to worry about someone looking up your pant leg. If a woman wants to wear pants or a dress who the hell should care? 

• seek women in combat in the military just like men, and coed submarine.

- Again if a woman is qualified to be in combat, and equally qualified what should stop her? Are the writers at conservapedia worried that a pair of boobs will distract the men on a sub? I'm sure that in a combat situation soldiers are not likely to be distracted by a woman... just saying with bombs are being dropped and there is gunfire is the fact that there is a woman there really going to influence the actions?

• refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying

- Again... this comes down to personal preference. Many of my feminist friends have taken their husbands last name. I am going to hyphenate my last name with my fiances, and he is going to do the same with my last name and his... what is the big deal here? Do you know how much it costs and how much hassle involved with changing your id? It's easier not to change your name... but whatever makes you happy.

• distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (Eg: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.) 

- Well if that were the case I wouldn't know that Henry VIII established the church of England, or I'd know more about Nefertiti than Akenaten, and many many more... which is not the case. When it comes to history in Women or Gender Studies classes we look at women and men who do not get the focus in traditional history classes because it is their ideas that are important. We looked at the sufferagests in both positive and negative light. Hey... didn't you guys change the history curriculum in Texas to remove all talk of the first amendment, and the separation of church and state in favor of displaying how the US was founded on Christian values and repaint history to wash over Christian atrocities? Hello pot this is kettle....

• object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey"; object to other female-only names, such as "temptress" 

- Again... personal preference. We all agree that language like "sweetheart" or "honey" is not appropriate in the work place right? Or is that what you are arguing against? Well I'm hoping that you are not that stupid, but outside of the workplace it is a matter of personal preference, and many women have their own reasons for liking or not liking various types of language... Doesn't everyone?

• take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.' 

- The offense that is taken is when it is assumed that these jobs can only be filled by men or women, as the usage implied, and was the case not that long ago. Don't you know that stewardesses could only be women until fairly recently? And had to be a certain height and weight as well as be considered good looking? You don't think that is a problem?

This concludes my examination of Conservapedia's definition of feminism, and how many problems that there are with that definition. It is also worth mentioning that there are many different types of feminism, radical, liberal, marxist, religious and many many more which you can see defined on the real Wikipedia at Feminism- Wikipedia. 

Until next time,
DD